By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

´╗┐Title: New Witnesses for God (Volume 3 of 3)
Author: Roberts, B. H. (Brigham Henry)
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "New Witnesses for God (Volume 3 of 3)" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.

(MormonTextsProject.org), with thanks to Renah Holmes and
Diane Evans.




By B. H. Roberts,

Author of "The Gospel," "Outlines of Ecclesiastical History," "Mormon
Doctrine of Deity," "Defense of the Faith and the Saints," "The
Prophet-Teacher," etc., etc. IN THREE VOLUMES



Salt Lake City



PART III. (Continued).



Indirect External Evidences (Continued).--American Traditions 3

I. The Signs of Messiah's Birth

II. The Signs of Messiah's Death


Indirect External Evidences--American Traditions (Continued)

I. Messiah in the Western Hemisphere

II. The Culture-Heroes of America

III. The Peruvian Tradition of the Messiah

IV. Topilitzen Quetzalcohuatl


External Evidences--The Hebrew Origin of the Native American
Races--Hebrew Relics

I. Garcia

II. Lord Kingsborough's Views

III. Adair's Evidences

The Discovery of Hebrew Relics

I. The Pittsfield Hebrew Parchment

11. The Newark Hebrew Tablet


The Discovery of Relics Other Than Hebrew

I. Cincinnati Gold Plate

II. The Kinderhook Plates

III. The Tuccabatchey Plates


External Evidence--Minor Coincidences--Race Unity

I. Central and Western New York an Ancient Battle Field

II. Miscellaneous Book of Mormon Historical Incidents and Nephite
Customs Found in the Native American Traditions

III. Human Sacrifices. Cannibalism

IV. Burying the Hatchet

V. Hagoth's Marine Migrations Preserved in Native Legends

VI. Native American Race Unity

VII. Did the Book of Mormon Antedate Works in English on American
Antiquities Accessible to Joseph Smith and His Associates

VIII. The Value of the Evidence Supplied by American Antiquities


External Evidences (Continued).--Evidence of the Bible

I. The Place of the Patriarch Joseph in Israel.--The Promises to Him
and His Seed

II. The Prophecies of Isaiah on the Coming Forth of the Book of Mormon

III. The Prophecy of Messiah in Relation to "Other Sheep" than Those in
Palestine that Must Hear His Voice


External Evidences (Continued.)--The Evidence of the Church to the Book


Internal Evidences--The Book of Mormon, in Style and Language, is
Consistent with the Theory of its Construction

I. Of the Unity and Diversity of Style

II. Characteristics of an Abridgement

III. Originality in Book of Mormon Names

IV. Of the Nephite Custom in Naming Cities and Provinces Being Ancient

V. Of the Nephites, Like the Jews, Being a Mononymous People


Internal Evidences (Continued).--The Book of Mormon Forms of Government
Consistent with the Times and Circumstances under which they Existed

I. Monarchies

II. Reign of the Judges--Republic

III. Ecclesiastical Government

IV. The Events to which Importance is Given in the Book of Mormon are
in Harmony with the Character of the Writers

V. Complexity in the Structure of the Book of Mormon in Harmony with
the Theory of its Origin


Internal Evidences (Continued).--The Originality of the Book of Mormon
an Evidence in Support of its Claims

I. Originality of Structure

II. Originality in Names

III. In the Manner of its Coming Forth

IV. Its Accounting for the Peopling of America

V. The Nativity of Ancient American Peoples

VI. Accounting for the Existence of Christian Ideas in America


Internal Evidences (Continued).--The Originality of the Book of Mormon
an Evidence in Support of its Claims. (Continued)

VII. The Fall of Adam--The Purpose of Man's Earth Existence--Adam fell
that men might be; Man an Immortal Spirit; Men are that they might have

VIII. The Agency of Man

IX. The Atonement

X. The Doctrine of Opposite Existences


Internal Evidences (Continued).--The Evidence of Prophecy:

I. A Testimony Shall be Given by the Holy Ghost....

II. "They Shall Have the Gift and Power of the Holy Ghost."

III. "Three Witnesses" Shall Behold the Book "By the Gift and Power of

IV. The Blood of Saints Shall Cry from the Ground

V "Because My Word Shall Hiss Forth, Many Shall say 'A Bible! A Bible'"

VI. The Lost Books of the Bible

VII. No Gentile Kings in America


Internal Evidences (Continued.)--The Evidence of Prophecy (Continued)

I. Many Shall Believe the Words of the Book

II. The Book of Mormon to be Taken to the American Indians

III. The Jews Shall Begin to Believe in Christ, and to Gather to Their

IV. The Work of the Lord to Commence Among all Nations to Bring About
'the Restoration of His People Israel, and a Universal Reign of Peace
and Righteousness

V. The Sign of the Modern World's Awakening

VI. Conditional Prophecies--The Evidence of Things Worthy of God to


Internal Evidences (Continued).--The Spirit of the Book

I. The Poetry the Book of Mormon has Inspired

II. Summary of Internal Evidences




Counter Theories of Origin

I. Alexander Campbell's Theory

II. The Spaulding Theory of Origin

III. The Sidney Rigdon Theory

IV. I. Woodbridge Riley's Theory of the Origin of the Book of Mormon


(Erratum.--The numeral II is repeated in this chapter, as also in this
table in order to correspond with the number in the chapter.)

Objections to the Book of Mormon

I. Errors in Style and Grammar

II. Objections Based Upon the Existence of Passages in the Book of
Mormon Which Follow King James' Translation

II. Miscellaneous Objections Based on Literary Style and Language

III. The Difficulty of Passages from Isaiah Being Quoted by Nephite
Writers, that Modern Bible Criticism Holds were not Written Until the
Time of the Babylonian Captivity--and not Written by Isaiah at all


(Erratum.--After using numerals in this chapter from IV to VII, by an
error, the printer began again at V and ran to X. There is no break in
the order of the subjects, however, in the chapter, and the numerals in
this table are made to correspond with those in the text.)

Objections to the Book of Mormon (Continued)

IV. Pre-Christian Era Knowledge of the Gospel

V. The Unlawfulness of Establishing the Priesthood with Others than the
Tribe of Levi

VI. Nephite Knowledge of the "Call of the Gentiles."

VII. The Difficulty of the Three Days of Darkness

V. The Birth of Jesus "at Jerusalem."

VI. The Settlement of Modern Controversies

VII. The Book Contains Nothing New

VIII. Modern Astronomy in the Book

IX. The Geography of the Book

X. Of the Objection that the Transcript of Characters Made from
the Nephite Plates by Joseph Smith, Bear no Resemblance to the
Hieroglyphics and Language Characters Discovered in Central America on
Stone Tablets, Maya Books and Mexican Picture Writing


Objections to the Book of Mormon (Continued)

I. Alleged Plagiarisms of Historical and Biblical Events.

II. The Absence of Book of Mormon Names Both of Places and Persons in
Native American Language

III. Nephi's Temple

IV. The Difficulty of Iron and Steel Among the Nephites

V. The Horse and Other Domestic Animals of the Book of Mormon

VI. The Barges of the Jaredite Colony

VII. The Marvels of Liahona--"Compass."

VIII. The Weight of the Plates

VIII. The Death of Shiz

IX. Concluding Reflections


The Evidences of the Truth of the Book of Mormon, Continued.







_The Signs of Messiah's Birth._

The impressive signs given in the western world, according to the Book
of Mormon, of the birth and death of Messiah were of such a character
that they would doubtless obtain a fixed place in the traditions of
the native American people, though, as in the case of all legends, the
events are more or less distorted.

The signs of Messiah's birth, both as prophetically promised and
historically described, are as follows:

    And behold, this will I give unto you for a sign at the time of
    his (Messiah's) coming; for behold, there shall be great lights in
    heaven insomuch that in the night before he cometh there shall be
    no darkness, insomuch that it shall appear unto man as if it were
    day, therefore there shall be one day and a night, and a day as if
    it were one day, and there were no night; and this shall be unto
    you for a sign; for ye shall know of the rising of the sun, and
    also if its setting; therefore they shall know of a surety that
    there shall be two days and a night; nevertheless the night shall
    not be darkened; and it shall be the night before he is born. And
    behold there shall a new star arise, such an one as ye never have
    beheld; and this also shall be a sign unto you. [1]

    And it came to pass that the words which came unto Nephi were
    fulfilled, according as they had been spoken; for behold at the
    going down of the sun, there was no darkness; and the people began
    to be astonished, because there was no darkness when the night
    came. * * * * * * And it came to pass also, that a new star did
    appear, according to the word. [2]

And now the native legends on this subject. From the native Central
American documents compiled and followed by Fuentes y Guzman, quoted by
Juarrors, whom Bancroft follows, it is learned that a certain Quiche
prince, Acxopil, the son of Nimaquiche, observing that his people had
greatly increased in number and influence, divided his empire into
three kingdoms. And now Bancroft, who is quoting Juarrors:

    Retaining for himself the first, he gave the second to his oldest
    son, Jiutemal, and the third to his second son, Acxiquat; and this
    division was made on a day when three suns were seen, which has
    caused some to think that it took place on the day of the birth of
    our Redeemer, a day on which it is commonly believed that such a
    meteor was observed. [3]

The "day when three suns were seen"--"the day of the birth of our
Redeemer"--easily accords with the two days and a night of the
continuous light of the Book of Mormon, especially when considered in
connection with the appearance of a "new star" (the "meteor" of the
quotation) as a sign to the Nephites of the birth of Messiah.

Referring to the traditions of the primitive Nahua period, after
dealing with the events of the first age, which treats of the creation,
flood, dispersion of mankind, the migration of a colony of seven
families to a new land, etc., Bancroft, following the native writer
Ixtilxochiti, deals with the second Nahua age, as follows:

    The second age, the "sun and air," terminated with a great
    hurricane which swept away trees, rocks, houses and people,
    although many men and women escaped, chiefly such as took refuge
    in caves which the hurricane could not reach. After several days
    the survivors came out to find a multitude of apes living in the
    land; and all this time they were in darkness, seeing neither the
    sun nor the moon. The next event recorded, although Veytia makes it
    precede the hurricane, is the stopping of the sun for a whole day
    in his course, as at the command of Joshua as recorded in the Old
    Testament, [4]

Let no one confound these cataclysms attended with darkness to the
flood period of the first Nahua age--which is identical with Noah's
flood; they relate to disasters subsequent to that period; they
correspond in time and character to the disasters described in the Book
of Mormon as taking place in the western hemisphere during the time of
the crucifixion and interment of Messiah in Judea. This, I believe,
will be established as reasonably clear as we proceed.

Concerning the foregoing passage, I also call attention to the fact
that Veytia is said to place before the tempest and the darkness of
the tradition the stopping of the sun for a whole day in his course,
as at the command of Joshua. Instead of having reference to the Joshua
incident, however, may not the incident of the American tradition have
reference to the Book of Mormon sign of Messiah's birth, these two days
and a night through which there was continuous light? [5] The apparent
"stopping of the sun a whole day in his course" would certainly give
the period of uninterrupted light required by the Book of Mormon sign
of Messiah's birth; and the fact that so noted an authority as Veytia
 [6] places that singular event before the fierce tempest attended by
darkness, restores the order of the events required by the Book of
Mormon account of those matters.

De Roo, quoting Bastian, [7] says:

    Another circumstance of the Savior's death seems to be remembered
    in Mexico, for it is related in its traditions that, at the
    disappearance of Topiltzin or Quetzalcohuatl, [a native culture
    hero most nearly resembling, as we shall see, the appearance and
    character of Messiah in the western world], both sun and moon were
    covered in darkness, while a single star appeared in the heavens.

Here, clear enough, is allusion to the darkness that covered the land
at Messiah's death; may not the star, which here appears out of order,
according to Book of Mormon statements, really have been the one which
appeared to the Nephites as the sign of Messiah's birth?


_The Signs of Messiah's Death._

The signs which were to be given to the inhabitants of the western
hemisphere of Messiah's death were foretold by a Lamanite prophet as

    Behold, in that day that he shall suffer death, the sun shall be
    darkened and refuse to give his light unto you; and also the moon,
    and the stars; and there shall be no light upon the face of this
    land, even from the time that he shall suffer death, for the space
    of three days, to the time that he shall rise again from the dead;
    yea, at the time that he shall yield up the ghost, there shall be
    thunderings and lightnings for the space of many hours, and the
    earth shall shake and tremble, and the rocks which are upon the
    face of this earth; which are both above the earth and beneath,
    which ye know at this time are solid, or the more part of it is
    one solid mass, shall be broken up; yea, they shall be rent in
    twain, and shall ever after be found in seams and in cracks, and in
    broken fragments upon the face of the whole earth; yea, both above
    the earth and beneath. And behold, there shall be great tempests,
    and there shall be many mountains laid low, like unto a valley,
    and there shall be many places which are now called valleys, which
    shall become mountains, whose height is great. And many highways
    shall be broken up, and many cities shall become desolate, and many
    graves shall be opened, and shall yield up many of their dead;
    and many saints shall appear unto many. And behold thus hath the
    angel spoken unto me; for he said unto me, that there should be
    thunderings and lightnings for the space of many hours; and he
    said unto me that while the thunder and the lightning lasted and
    the tempest, that these things should be, and that darkness should
    cover the face of the whole earth [9] for the space of three days.

This prediction was literally and awfully fulfilled. Mormon's condensed
account of it being as follows:

    And it came to pass in the thirty and fourth year, in the first
    month, in the fourth day of the month, there arose a great storm,
    such an one as never had been known in all the land; and there was
    also a great and terrible tempest; and there was terrible thunder,
    insomuch that it did shake the whole earth as if it was about to
    divide asunder; and there were exceeding sharp lightnings, such as
    never had been known in all the land. And the city of Zarahemla
    did take fire; and the city of Moroni did sink into the depths of
    the sea, and the inhabitants thereof were drowned; and the earth
    was carried up upon the city of Moronihah, that in the place of
    the city there became a great mountain; and there was a great and
    terrible destruction in the land southward. But behold, there
    was a more great and terrible destruction in the land northward;
    for behold, the whole face of the land was changed, because of
    the tempest, and the whirlwinds, and the thunderings, and the
    lightnings, and the exceeding great quaking of the whole earth;
    and the highways were broken up, and the level roads were spoiled,
    and many smooth places became rough, and many great and notable
    cities were sunk, and many were burned, and many were shaken till
    the buildings thereof had fallen to the earth, and the inhabitants
    thereof were slain; and the places were left desolate; and there
    were some cities which remained; but the damage thereof was
    exceeding great, and there were many in them who were slain; and
    there was some who were carried away in the whirlwind; and whither
    they went, no man knoweth, save they know that they were carried
    away; and thus the face of the whole earth became deformed, because
    of the tempests, and the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the
    quaking of the earth. And behold, the rocks were rent in twain;
    they were broken up upon the face of the whole earth, insomuch,
    that they were found in broken fragments, and in seams, and in
    cracks, upon all the face of the land. And it came to pass that
    when the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the storm, and the
    tempest, and the quakings of the earth did cease--for behold, they
    did last for about the space of three hours; and it was said by
    some that the time was greater; nevertheless, all these great and
    terrible things were done in about the space of three hours; and
    then behold, there was darkness upon the face of the land. And it
    came to pass that there was thick darkness upon all the face of the
    land, insomuch, that the inhabitants thereof who had not fallen,
    could feel the vapour of darkness; and there could be no light
    because of the darkness; neither candles, neither torches; neither
    could there be fire kindled with their fine and exceedingly dry wood,
    so that there could not be any light at all; and there was not any
    light seen, neither fire, nor glimmer, neither the sun, nor the
    moon, nor the stars, so great were the mists of darkness which were
    upon the face of the land. And it came to pass that it did last for
    the space of three days, that there was no light seen; and there
    was great mourning, and howling, and weeping among all the people
    continually; yea, great were the groanings of the people, because
    of the darkness and the great destruction which had come upon them.

From the Book of Mormon we learn that it was in the morning that these
terrible cataclysms began, and then were followed by the three days of
darkness: for in giving an account of the passing away of this terrible
calamity, Mormon says: "Thus did the the three days pass away. And it
was in the morning, and the darkness dispersed from all the face of the
earth and the earth did cease to tremble." [12] On this matter of the
signs of Messiah's crucifixion taking place "in the morning," according
to American time, the late Orson Pratt made the following valuable

    This book, the Book of Mormon, informs us that the time of day
    at which Jesus was crucified, I mean the time of day here in
    America, was in the morning; the New Testament tells us that
    Jesus was crucified in Asia in the afternoon, between the sixth
    and ninth hour according to the Jews' reckoning. They commenced
    their reckoning at six o'clock in the morning, and consequently
    the sixth hour would be twelve o'clock at noon, and the ninth hour
    three o'clock in the afternoon. Jesus, from the sixth to the ninth
    hour, in other words from twelve o'clock to three, was hanging
    on the cross. Now the Book of Mormon, or the historians whose
    records it contains, when relating the incidents that transpired
    at the time of the crucifixion--the darkness that was spread over
    the face of the land, the earthquakes, the rending of rocks, the
    sinking of cities and the whirlwinds--say these events occurred
    in the morning; they also say that darkness was spread over the
    face of the land for the space of three days. In Jerusalem it was
    only three hours. But the Lord gave them a special sign in this
    country and the darkness lasted three days, and at the expiration
    of three days, and three nights of darkness, it cleared off, and it
    was in the morning. That shows that, according to the time of this
    country, [America] the crucifixion must have taken place in the

Says one, "Is not this a contradiction between the Book of Mormon
and the New Testament?" To an unlearned person it would really be a
contradiction, for the four Evangelists place it [the time during which
Jesus was on the cross] from twelve to three in the afternoon, while
the Book of Mormon says in the morning. An unlearned person, seeing
this discrepancy, would say, of course, that both books cannot be true.

If the Book of Mormon be true the Bible cannot be; and if the Bible be
true the Book of Mormon cannot be.

I do not known that anybody ever brought up this objection, for I do
not think they ever thought of it. I do not think that the Prophet
Joseph, who translated the book, ever thought of this apparent
discrepancy. "But," says one, "how do you account for it being in
the morning in America and in the afternoon in Jerusalem?" Simply by
the difference in longitude. This would make a difference of time of
several hours; for when it would be twelve at noon in Jerusalem it
would only be half-past four in the morning in the north-west part
of South America, where the Book of Mormon was then being written.
Seven and a half hours difference in longitude would account for
this apparent discrepancy; and if the Book of Mormon had said the
crucifixion took place in the afternoon we should have known at once
that it could not be true. This is incidental proof to learned or
scientific men that they cannot very well reason away, and especially
when the instrument [i. e. Joseph Smith] who brought forth the Book of
Mormon is considered. It must be remembered that he was but a youth,
and unlearned; and, when he translated this work, I presume that he was
unaware that there was any difference in the time of day, according to
the longitude, in different parts of the earth. I do not suppose that
Joseph ever thought about it to the day of his death. I never heard him
or any other person bring forth this as confirmatory evidence of the
divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon. I never thought of it myself
until years after Joseph's death; but when I did reflect upon it, I
could see the reason why the Lord, through his servants, has said in
the Book of Mormon, that the crucifixion took place in the morning. [13]

In addition to the passages already quoted, giving the native
traditions which, doubtless contain references to the cataclysms at the
death of Messiah, as well as to the signs of his birth, Bancroft gives
a Toltec tradition directly bearing on the subject, as follows:

    The sun and moon were eclipsed, the earth shook, and the rocks were
    rent asunder, and many other things and signs happened, though
    there was no loss of life. This was in the year Ce Calli, which,
    the chronology being reduced to our system, proves to be the same
    date when Christ our Lord suffered, 33 A. D. [14]

The statement in the foregoing that there was no loss of life resulting
from this cataclysm is the only item that mars its perfect agreement
with the Book of Mormon incident.

    Bouturini, commending the exact chronology of the ancient Mexicans
    says: "No pagan nation refers primitive events to fixed creation of
    the world, of the deluge, of the confusion of tongues at the time
    of the Tower of Babel, of the other epochs and ages of the world,
    of their ancestors' long travel in Asia, with the years precisely
    distinguished by their corresponding characters. They record in
    the year of Seven Rabbits the great eclipse which happened at the
    crucifixion of Christ our Lord. [15]

The date assigned for this eclipse of sun and moon (darkness), and the
attendant earthquakes in the foregoing quotations, is corroborated in
a very remarkable manner by the native Peruvian historian Montesinos,
quoted by Rivero and Tschudi. In giving a list of the Peruvian
monarchs, when reaching the sixtieth, Manco-Capac III., our authors say:

    According to the Amautas [Peruvian "wise men," or philosophers]
    this prince reigned in the year two thousand nine hundred and fifty
    after the deluge, and consequently at the birth of Jesus Christ, an
    epoch when Peru had reached her highest elevation and extension.

Following this sixtieth monarch came Cayo-Manco-Capec III., who reigned
twenty years. He was followed by Sinchi-Ayar-Manco, who reigned seven
years. He, by Huamantaco-Amauta, who reigned five years; which brings
us to the year thirty-two A. D., and then follows this statement by
our authors, which corroborates the date cited by Bancroft for the
cataclysm under consideration, viz:

    During his reign [thirty-two or thirty-three A. D.], [17] they
    experienced earthquakes that lasted several months. [18]

Brasseur de Bourbourg, [19] to whom Bancroft gives high praise as an
authority on the languages and traditions of Central America, speaks
of physical cataclysms which, according to the native traditions, took
place in that part of America, and which are undoubtedly the imperfect
accounts of those cataclysms which occurred at the death of Messiah,
as recorded in the Book of Mormon. Brasseur became infatuated with the
Atlantis theory, and regarded the native American traditions concerning
the physical convulsions in nature as describing the submergence of
the ancient Atlantis. With the theory of the learned Frenchman I have
nothing to do. He may have made a wrong application of the facts of
the native traditions. I think he did. But what I am interested in
is the fact that so highly commended an authority draws from native
sources the tradition of physical cataclysms which so nearly accord
with the statements of fact in the Book of Mormon. [20] After relating
Brasseur's connection with the Atlantis theory, Baldwin says:

    In the first place, Brasseur de Bourbourg claims that there is in
    the old Central American books a constant tradition of an immense
    catastrophe of the character supposed [i. e., the convulsions which
    submerged Atlantis]; that this tradition existed every where among
    the people when they first became known to Europeans; and that
    recollections of the catastrophe were preserved in some of their
    festivals, especially in one celebrated in the month of Izcalli,
    which was instituted to commemorate this frightful destruction
    of land and people, and in which "princes and people humbled
    themselves before the divinity, and besought him to withhold a
    return of such terrible calamities." This tradition affirms that
    a part of the continent extending into the Atlantic was destroyed
    in the manner supposed, [submerged] and appear to indicate that
    the destruction was accomplished by a succession of frightful
    convulsions. Three are constantly mentioned, and sometimes there
    is mention of one or two others. "The land was shaken by frightful
    earthquakes, and the waves of the sea combined with volcanic fires
    to overwhelm and ingulf it." Each convulsion swept away portions
    of the land, until the whole disappeared, leaving the line of the
    coast as it is now. Most of the inhabitants, overtaken amid their
    regular employments, were destroyed; but some escaped in ships,
    and some fled for safety to the summits of high mountains, or
    to portions of the land which, for the time, escaped immediate
    destruction. Quotations are made from the old books in which this
    tradition is recorded which appear to verify his report of what is
    found in them. To criticise intelligently his interpretation of
    their significance, one needs to have a knowledge of those books
    and tradition equal at least to his own. [21]

Nadaillac also refers to the native traditions collected by Brasseur on
this subject and quotes him as follows:

    If I may judge from allusions in the documents that I have been
    fortunate enough to collect, there were in these regions, at that
    remote date, convulsions of nature, deluges, terrible inundations,
    followed by the upheaval of mountains, accompanied by volcanic
    eruptions. These traditions, traces of which are also met with in
    Mexico, Central America, Peru, and Bolivia, point to the conclusion
    that man existed in these various countries at the time of the
    upheaval of the Cordilleras, and that the memory of that upheaval
    has been preserved: [22]

Treating of a number of old Central American traditions on his own
account, Nadaillac says:

    Other traditions allude to convulsions of nature, to inundations,
    and profound disturbances, to terrible deluges, in the midst of
    which mountains and volcanoes suddenly rose up. [23]

Nothing, perhaps, connected with the signs of Messiah's death would
be more impressive than the awful fact of the three days' darkness,
and nothing would be more likely to be preserved in the traditions of
the people than this singular fact. From generation to generation it
would be remembered with terror. It is beyond question the traditional
remembrance of that event which so terrorized the native Americans
at every recurrence of an eclipse of the sun. Of this fact Bancroft

    The Mexicans were much troubled and distressed by an eclipse of
    the sun. They thought that he was much disturbed and tossed about
    by something, and that he was becoming seriously jaundiced. This
    was the occasion of a general panic, women weeping aloud, and men
    howling and shouting and striking the hand upon the mouth. There
    was an immediate search for men with white hair and white faces,
    and these were sacrificed to the sun, amid the din and tumult of
    singing and musical instruments. It was thought that should the
    eclipse become once total, there would be an end of the light, and
    that in the darkness the demons would come down to the devouring of
    the people. [24]

It was also the traditional remembrance of the terror of darkness,
connected with the death of Messiah, which undoubtedly created the
anxiety concerning the renewal of fire at the conclusion of each cycle
of fifty-two years recognized in the Mexican chronology. The Mexicans,
as represented in some of the notes we have quoted from different
authors, hold the tradition of the destruction of the world at four
successive epochs. And, says, Prescott:

    They looked forward confidently to another such catastrophy, to
    take place like the preceding, at the close of a cycle, when the
    sun was to be effaced from the heavens, the human race from the
    earth, and when darkness of chaos was to settle on the habitable
    globe. The cycle would end in the latter part of December, and,
    as the dreary season of the winter solstice approached, and the
    diminished light of day gave melancholy presage of its speedy
    extinction their apprehensions increased; and on the arrival
    of the five unlucky days which close the year, they abandoned
    themselves to despair. They broke in pieces the little images of
    their household gods, in whom they no longer trusted. The holy
    fires were suffered to go out in the temples, and none were lighted
    in their own dwellings. Their furniture and domestic utensils
    were destroyed; their garments torn in pieces; and everything
    was thrown into disorder, for the coming of the evil genii who
    were to descend on the desolate earth. On the evening of the last
    day, a procession of priests, assuming the dress and ornaments of
    their gods, moved from the capital towards a lofty mountain, about
    two leagues distant. They carried with them a noble victim, the
    flower of their captivities, and an apparatus for kindling the
    new fire, the success of which was an augury of the renewal of
    the cycle. On reaching the summit of the mountain, the procession
    paused till midnight; when, as the constellation of the Pleiades
    approached the zenith, the new fire was kindled by the friction of
    the sticks placed on the wounded breast of the victim. The flame
    was soon communicated to a funeral pile, on which the body of the
    slaughtered captive was thrown. As the light streamed up towards
    heaven, shouts of joy and triumph burst forth from the countless
    multitudes who covered the hills, the terraces of the temples and
    the house-tops, with eyes anxiously bent on the mount of sacrifice.
    Couriers, with torches lighted at the blazing beacon, rapidly bore
    them over every part of the country; and the cheering element was
    seen brightening on altar and hearthstone, for the circuit of many
    a league, long before the sun, rising on his accustomed track,
    gave assurance that a new cycle had commenced its march, and that
    the laws of nature were not to be reversed for the Aztecs. The
    following thirteen days were given up to festivity. [25]

Whence this terror of the darkness? Whence this rejoicing at the
assurance of continued light, unless back of both terror and rejoicing
somewhere in the history of the people there was some such circumstance
as described in the Book of Mormon which gave cause for this terror
of darkness on the one hand, and the rejoicing at the assurance of a
continuation of light on the other?


1. Helaman xiv: 3, 5.

2. III. Nephi i: 15, 21.

3. Native Races, Bancroft, Vol. V., p. 566.

4. Native Races, Bancroft, Vol. V., pp. 209, 210.

5. See Helaman xiv: 3, 4, 5; and III. Nephi 1: 15-21.

6. Don Mariano Veytia was born of an ancient and highly respected
family at Puebli, Mexico, 1718. After finishing his academic education
he went to Spain where he was kindly received at court. He visited
several other countries of Europe, made himself acquainted with
their languages and returned home and devoted the rest of his life
chiefly to the illustration of the national history and antiquities
of his country. He composed various works, but his "Antiquities of
Mexico" is the only one which went to press. His history covers the
whole period from the first occupation of Aauhuac to the middle of
the fifteenth century, at which time his labors were unfortunately
terminated by his death, which occurred in 1780. In the early portion
of his "Antiquities" he endeavored to trace the migratory movements
and historic annals of the race who entered the country. "Every page,"
remarks Prescott, "bears testimony of the extent and fidelity of his
researches." (Conquest of Mexico, Vol. I., p. 40.) The author of the
history of the "Antiquities of Mexico," tom. I., chapter ii, dates
the first migration of the Nahuas from the year 2,237, after the
creation" quoted by Nadaillac "Prehistoric America," p. 261. This date
is somewhat in agreement with the time at which the Book of Mormon
represents the Jaredites as arriving in the western world.

7. Adolf Bastian was born in June, 1826. He was a Prussian ethnologist
of note, being professor of that science at Berlin, and demonstrator
of the ethnological museum. He succeeded Virchow as president of the
Berlin Anthropological society. He traveled in Peru, Columbia and
Central America in 1851-66. It is from his works that De Roo quotes the
above tradition.

8. History of America Before Columbus, p. 431.

9. "Darkness cover the face of the whole earth," etc. This expression
should be understood as limited by one that precedes it in the
quotation, viz., "there should be no light upon the face of this land,"
meaning America. Nothwithstanding the "face of the whole earth" the
darkness was limited to the western hemisphere.

10. Helaman xiv: 20-27.

11. III. Nephi viii: 5-23.

12. III. Nephi x: 9 and note 'f.'

13. Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol. XIII., pp. 128, 129.

14. Native Races, Vol. V., p. 210.

15. Kingsborough's Mexican Antiquities, Vol. VI., p. 176, note.
Bouturini is an authority frequently quoted by Prescott, who has an
extended note upon the valuable collection of native memorials of
primitive civilization of America made by Bouturini. (See "Conquest
of Mexico" Vol. I., p. 126). He was a Milanese by birth, and came to
America in 1735 on some business of the Countess Santibanez, a lineal
descendant of Montezuma. While in America he traveled extensively in
Mexico and Central America, and made the before mentioned collection
of memorials. Baldwin also mentions him with approval. (See "Ancient
America," p. 195.)

16. Peruvian Antiquities, Tschudi, p. 59.

17. Peruvian Antiquities, Tschudi, p. 60. Compare III. Nephi, chap.

18. I say the year A. D. 32, or 33, for the reason that we do not
know how long the reign of Manco-Capac III--who is represented in
the foregoing quotation as reigning "at the time of the birth of
Christ"--continued after the birth of Messiah; not long evidently; but
sufficiently long to make up the difference between A. D. 32 and the
time of Messiah's death. Baldwin also refers to the same event, Ancient
America, p. 266.

19. Born in France, 1814. Died at Nice, 1874. A French clergyman,
ethnologist and author. He was teacher and priest in Canada and the
United States 1845-48. From 1854-1863 he traveled extensively in Mexico
and Central America studying Indian antiquities and ancient manuscripts.

20. Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 127, 129.

21. Ancient America, pp. 176, 177.

22. Pre-Historic America, pp. 16, 17.

23. Pre-Historic America, p. 527.

24. Native Races, Vol. III., p. 110.

25. Conquest of Mexico, Vol. I., pp. 105, 106.




_Messiah in the Western Hemisphere._

The appearance of Messiah in the western hemisphere, no less than the
signs of his birth and death, is a circumstance that would undoubtedly
find lodgment in the tradition of the native Americans. The manner of
it, as described in the Book of Mormon, was as follows: It appears that
a short time after the cataclysms which were the sign to the western
world of Messiah's death, a number of people in the land Bountiful--a
district of country in South America where the isthmus of Panama joins
the south continent, and most likely including some part of that
isthmus--were in the vicinity of a temple that had escaped destruction,
and were conversing upon the many physical changes which had taken
place in the land, and also of this same Jesus, of whose death they had
received such appalling evidences, when--but let me quote the account
of the event from the Book of Mormon:

    And it came to pass that while they were conversing one with
    another, they heard a voice as it came out of heaven; and they cast
    their eyes round about, for they understood not the voice which
    they heard; and it was not a harsh voice, neither was it a loud
    voice; and notwithstanding it being a small voice, it did pierce
    them that did hear to the centre, insomuch that there was no part
    of their frame that it did not cause to quake; yea, it did pierce
    them to the very soul and did cause their hearts to burn. And it
    came to pass that again they heard the voice, and they understood
    it not; and again the third time they did hear the voice, and did
    open their ears to hear it; and their eyes were towards the sound
    thereof; and they did look steadfastly towards heaven, from whence
    the sound came; and behold the third time they did understand the
    voice which they heard; and it said unto them, "Behold my beloved
    son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name:
    hear ye him." And it came to pass as they understood, they cast
    their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a man
    descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe, and
    he came down and stood in the midst of them, and the eyes of the
    whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their
    mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they
    thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them. And it came to
    pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people,
    saying, Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified
    should come into the world; and behold, I am the light and the life
    of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the
    Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon
    me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of
    the Father in all things from the beginning. And it came to pass
    that when Jesus had spoken these words, the whole multitude fell to
    the earth, for they remembered that it had been prophesied among
    them that Christ should shew himself unto them after his ascension
    into heaven. [1]

The task before us now is to ascertain if there is anything in the
native American traditions which sustain the probability of this
historical incident. Of course the reader must not be surprised if he
finds the native traditions on such a subject very much confused. All
such traditions, as I have before remarked, are so confused. Besides
it must be remembered that there were several great characters among
the inhabitants of the western world, according to the Book of Mormon,
who would likely be confounded with Messiah in the native traditions;
such as Moriancumr and Coriantumr among the Jaredites, the first and
the last great leaders, respectively, of that ancient people. Then
there is the first Nephi, Mulek, the first Mosiah, and several of the
Lord's apostles chosen from among the Nephites that are likely to be
confounded with Messiah and their mission with his ministry among
the people. But notwithstanding this confusion, I think evidences
of this advent of Messiah in the western world are traceable in the
native traditions; and I should be much disappointed if I had found it
otherwise, for of all incidents in Book of Mormon history, the advent
of Messiah is the most important.


_Of the Culture-Heroes of America._

Speaking of American "culture-heroes" in general, Bancroft says:

    Although bearing various names and appearing in different
    countries, the American culture-heroes all present the same general
    characteristics. They are all described as white, bearded men,
    generally clad in long robes; appearing suddenly and mysteriously
    upon the scene of their labors, they at once set about improving
    the people by instructing them in useful and ornamental arts,
    giving them laws, exhorting them to practice brotherly love and
    other Christian virtues, and introducing a milder and better form
    of religion; having accomplished their mission, they disappear
    as mysteriously and unexpectedly as they came; and finally,
    they are apotheosized and held in great reverence by a grateful
    posterity. In such guise or on such mission did Quetzalcohuatl
    appear in Cholula, Votan in Chiapas, Wixepecocha in Ojaca, Zamna,
    and Cukulcan with his nineteen disciples, in Yucatan, Gucumatz in
    Guatemala, Viracocha in Peru, Sume and Paye-Tome in Brazil, the
    mysterious apostle mentioned by Rosales, in Chili, and Bochica in
    Colombia. Peruvian legends speak of a nation of giants who came by
    sea, waged war with the natives, and erected splendid edifices,
    the ruins of many of which still remain. Besides these, there are
    numerous vague traditions of settlements or nations of white men,
    who lived apart from the other people of the country, and were
    possessed of an advanced civilization. [2]

I suggest, in passing, that the part of the tradition which relates to
the existence "of settlements or nations of white men who lived apart
from the other people of the country, and were possessed of an advanced
civilization," refers to those conditions that prevailed when the
Nephites and Lamanites occupied the land; the former an industrious,
civilized race, the latter an idle, savage race, conditions frequently
referred to in the Book of Mormon, in describing the status of the
Nephites and Lamanites, respectively.

Observe also that Bancroft, in the foregoing statement, says of some
of the characters that, having accomplished their mission, they
mysteriously disappeared. There are several such characters spoken
of in the Book of Mormon. Such was the case with the second Alma, a
noted Nephite character of the first half of the century immediately
preceding the advent of Messiah. He was the first president or "judge"
of the Nephite republic, also high priest of the Church, uniting in his
person the two offices--a thing not unusual among the Nephites, [3]
nor among the native Americans, if their annals may be trusted. [4]
After completing his life's mission, and making a remarkable prediction
concerning the destruction of the Nephite people, Alma departed out
of the land, "and it came to pass that he was never heard of more; as
to his death or burial we know not of. Behold, this we know, that he
was a righteous man; and the saying went abroad in the church that
he was taken by the Spirit, or buried by the hand of the Lord." [5]
In a similar manner, Nephi, the father of Nephi, the apostle, a very
noted Nephite leader and prophet, departed out of the land in the same
mysterious manner. [6]

The quotation just made from Bancroft on the culture-heroes of
America represents them as quite numerous; we shall see, however, as
we proceed, that a number of them are the same person remembered in
different countries under different names and titles, and that in
the character and mission of each there is much similarity. Because
of this similarity, however, it must not be supposed that it is my
intention to claim each of these "culture heroes" as a more or less
tradition-distorted representation of Messiah; and the life and
mission of the culture-hero a distorted account of Messiah's advent
and mission among the Nephites. Quite to the contrary, I believe that
the traditions concerning some of these "culture-heroes" more nearly
represent other Book of Mormon characters than they do Messiah. Such,
for instance, is Votan, the supposed founder of the Maya confederation.
Some things in his character and career make him more nearly resemble
Moriancumr, the leader of the Jaredite colony, than Messiah. Bancroft,
in one summary of the legends respecting him, says:

    Votan, another mysterious personage, closely resembling
    Quetzalcohuatl in many points, was the supposed founder of the
    Maya civilization. He is said to have been a descendant of Noah and
    to have assisted at the building of the Tower of Babel. After the
    confusion of tongues he led a portion of the dispersed people to
    America. There he established the kingdom of Xibalba and built the
    city of Palenque. [7]

Then again, in some respects, Votan resembles the first Nephi. He
is said to have come to America one thousand years B. C.; [8] Nephi
came early in the sixth century B. C.; Votan brought with him seven
families; the Nephite colony, as nearly as may be estimated, on
reaching America, consisted of eight families. [9] Votan came to
America by divine commandment; so, too, did the Nephite colony. [10]
Votan wrote a book, in which he inscribed a complete record of all he
had done; [11] so, also, did Nephi. [12] Votan united in his person the
qualities of high priest and king; so, also, did Nephi.

After saying all this, however, it has to be admitted that there are
some things in the legends concerning Votan which do not run parallel
with the career of Nephi. Such, for instance, as his alleged visit to
Spain, Rome, Jerusalem, where, in the latter place, he saw the temple
of Solomon building; also his visit to the Euphrates valley, where
he saw the unfinished Tower of Babel. The part of his story which
describes his finding in America a colony of the same race as his
own people, reminds one of the first Mosiah, who found the people of
Zarahemla, in the valley of the Sidon. It will be remembered that these
people came from Jerusalem, were Jews, and are known as the colony of
Mulek. These varied legends concerning Votan resembling in the respects
here pointed out the several Book of Mormon characters, lead one to
regard as reasonable the supposition advanced by nearly all writers who
speak of him, that Votan is a generic name; and that the legends which
center about this name represent the exploits of several of America's
culture-heroes, [13] and, as I believe, of several Book of Mormon


_The Peruvian Tradition of the Messiah._

The natives of Chili have the following tradition concerning one
of their culture-heroes, which closely resembles Messiah as he was
revealed to the Nephites:

    Rosales, in his inedited (i. e. unpublished) History of Chili,
    declares that the inhabitants of that extremely southern portion
    of America, situated at the distance of so many thousand miles
    from New Spain, and who did not employ paintings to record
    events, accounted for their knowledge of some of the doctrines of
    Christianity by saying, "that in former times, as they had heard
    their fathers say, a wonderful man had come to that country,
    wearing a long beard, with shoes, and a mantle such as the Indians
    carry on their shoulders, who performed many miracles, cured the
    sick with water, caused it to rain, and their crops and grain
    to grow, kindled fire at a breath, and wrought other marvels,
    healing at once the sick, and giving sight to the blind; and that
    he spoke with as much propriety and elegance in the language of
    their country as if he had always resided in it, addressing them
    in words very sweet and new to them, telling them that the Creator
    of the universe resided in the highest place of heaven, and that
    many men and women who were resplendent as the sun dwelt with him.
    They say that he shortly afterwards went to Peru, and that many, in
    imitation of the habit and shoes which that man used, introduced
    among themselves the fashion of wearing shoes, and the loose mantle
    over the shoulders, either fastened with a clasp at the breast, or
    knotted at the corners, whence it may be inferred that this man was
    some apostle whose name they do not know." [14]

The points of comparison between the character referred to in the
foregoing quotation and the Messiah in his ministry among the Nephites,

First: In personal appearance, if due allowance be made for the
imperfect description in the legend.

Second: In the character of the work performed, especially in
the matter of healing of the sick. While in their midst Jesus is
represented as saying to the Nephites:

    Have ye any that are sick among you, bring them hither. Have ye
    any that are lame, or blind, or halt, or maimed, or leprous, or
    that are withered, or that are deaf, or that are afflicted in
    any manner? Bring them hither and I will heal them, for I have
    compassion upon you; my bowels are filled with mercy; for I
    perceive that ye desire that I shew unto you what I have done unto
    your brethren at Jerusalem, for I see that your faith is sufficient
    that I should heal you. And it came to pass that when he had thus
    spoken, all the multitude, with one accord, did go forth with their
    sick, and their afflicted, and their lame, and with their blind,
    and with their dumb, and with all them that were afflicted in any
    manner; and he did heal them every one as they were brought forth
    unto him. [15]

Third: In relation to the graciousness of his language, the third Nephi
represents the Savior as praying for the Nephites in this manner:

    And the things which he prayed cannot be written, and the multitude
    did bear record who heard him. And after this manner did they
    bear record: "The eye hath never seen, neither hath the ear heard
    before, so great and marvelous things as we saw and heard Jesus
    speak unto the Father, and no tongue can speak, neither can there
    be written by any man, neither can the heart of man conceive so
    great and marvelous things as we both saw and heard Jesus speak;
    and no one can conceive of the joy which filled our souls at the
    time we heard him pray for us unto the Father." [16]

Fourth: Relative to teaching the people, that many men and women were
resplendent in their glory and were already dwelling with God, the Book
of Mormon mentions the circumstance of Jesus taking very great pains to
have recorded in the Nephite annals the fact that many of the ancient
Saints arose from the dead and appeared unto many and ministered
unto them; [17] and from the whole tenor of his instructions to the
Nephites, as found in III. Nephi, it is clear that there was ever
present in his thought the fact of redeemed and glorified immortals
dwelling with God in his kingdom.

Fifth: The reference in the quotation to the departure of the man-God
for another land is paralleled in the Book of Mormon account of Jesus,
where he is represented as declaring the existence of the lost tribes
of the house of Israel, and the declaration of his intention to visit
them. "Now," said he, "I go unto the Father, and also to show myself
unto the lost tribes of Israel, for they are not lost unto the Father,
for he knoweth whither he hath taken them." [18]


_Topilitzen Quetzalcohuatl._

This personage appears under different names in the native traditions
of various countries of America. In the Popol Vuh of the Quiches he is
known under the title of Gucumatz; [19] in Yucatan he appears under
the name of Cukulcan; [20] in Oajaca (despite some difficulties and
contradictions) as Huemac; and in Mexico, par excellence, as Toplitzin
Quetzalcohuatl. Respecting this character, various opinions are held.
By some he is regarded as the Apostle St. Thomas, whom they credit with
coming to America and preaching the Christian religion. "In support
of their opinion," says Bancroft, "that he [Quetzalcohuatl] was no
other than the apostle, they allege that the hero-god's proper name,
Topilitzen Quetzalcohuatl, closely resembles in sound and signification
that of 'Thomas, surnamed Didymus;' for 'to' in the Mexican name,
is an abbreviation of Thomas, to which 'pilcin,' meaning 'son' or
'disciple,' is added; while the meaning of Quetzalcohuatl (in the Aztec
language) is exactly the same as that of the Greek name 'Didymus,' 'a
twin,' being compounded of 'quetzalli,' a 'plume of green feathers,'
metaphorically signifying anything precious, and 'coatl,' a serpent,
metaphorically meaning one of two twins." [21]

Lord Kingsborough, it is well known, is the foremost among those who
have identified this traditionary personage (Quetzalcohuatl) with the
Hebrew Messiah--Jesus of Nazareth; and to this subject he devoted
an incredible amount of labor and research. [22] As Kingsborough's
interpretation of the name, Topilitzin Quetzalcohuatl, as also the
substance of his argument will appear in quotations from his works,
it is not necessary to make a statement of them here. Let it suffice,
at this point, to say that native American traditions assign too many
of the qualities of Deity to Quetzalcohuatl to regard him merely as
a man; and while many things are ascribed to him that are not in
harmony with the character and mission of Messiah as set forth in
the Book of Mormon, still one may trace the outlines of Messiah's
advent and labors among the Nephites in the career of Quetzalcohuatl,
as also the qualities of his divinity in what tradition ascribes to
the Aztec deity. As for those adventures and human qualities found
in Quetzalcohuatl not properly ascribable to Messiah, they arise,
doubtless, out of the fact that the native traditions have confounded
some of the exploits and characteristics of other great personages who
have figured in their history with those of Messiah.

In order that the reader may have a fairly full account of what is said
of this American man-divinity, I shall quote what several reliable
authorities have said of him, beginning with Prescott:

    A far more interesting personage in their [i. e. the Mexicans]
    mythology was Quetzalcohuatl, god of the air, a divinity, during
    his residence on earth, instructed the natives in the use of
    metals, in agriculture, and in the arts of government. He was one
    of those benefactors of their species, doubtless, who have been
    deified by gratitude of posterity. Under him, the earth teemed
    with fruits and flowers, without the pains of culture. An ear of
    Indian corn was as much as a single man could carry. The cotton,
    as it grew took of its own accord, the rich dyes of human art. The
    air was filled with intoxicating perfumes and the sweet melody of
    birds. In short, these were the halcyon days, which find a place
    in the mythic systems of so many nations in the Old World. It
    was the golden age of Anahuac. From some cause, not explained,
    Quetzalcohuatl, incurred the wrath of one of the principal gods,
    and was compelled to abandon the country. On his way, he stopped at
    the city of Cholula, where a temple was dedicated to his worship,
    the massy ruins of which still form one of the most interesting
    relics of antiquity in Mexico. When he reached the shores of the
    Mexican Gulf, he took leave of his followers, promising that he and
    his descendants would visit them hereafter, and then, entering his
    wizard skiff, made of serpents' skins, embarked on the great ocean
    for the fabled land of Tlapallan. He was said to have been tall in
    stature, with a white skin, long, dark hair, and a flowing beard.
    The Mexicans looked confidently to the return of the benevolent
    deity; and this remarkable tradition, deeply cherished in their
    hearts, prepared the way. * * * * * * for the future success of the
    Spaniards. [23]

After referring to the numerous, lengthy, intricate and even
contradictory legendary statements of the American aborigines which
in full may only be learned from the elaborate works of Brasseur de
Bourbourg, Lord Kingsborough, and H. H. Bancroft--P. De Roo remarks:

    It is the universal opinion of the learned that Quetzalcohuatl is
    identically the same personage with the contemporary religious and
    civil reformer whom various nations have deified under different
    names; that he is the same with Huemac or Vemac, as the Mexicans
    also called him; with Topilitzin, as he was more anciently known
    in Tulla by the Toltecs; with Wixipecocha, under whose name he was
    venerated by the Zapotecs; with Zamna, Cozas, or Cukulcan, the
    theocratic ruler of Yucatan; nay, with Bochica, the civilizer of
    Cundinamarca of New Granada, and with Viracocha of Peru.

In the remainder of the quotation from our author, he speaks of this
one person under his various names and titles:

    Quetzalcohuatl arrived at Tulla, the Toltec capital, from Panuco,
    a small place on the Gulf of Mexico, where he had first landed.
    Duran likewise relates that Topilitzin was a foreigner, but could
    not learn from what parts he had come. His name, given him by the
    natives, signified "Beautiful feathered serpent." Culkulcan, his
    Maya or Yucatec appellation, had exactly the same meaning. It was
    the name of princes and Toltec kings, and probably designates
    some honorable title, which, if we should make a few learned
    considerations, might be found to be the Great or the Glorious
    man of the country. * * * * * * The Indians remembered well that
    their god Quetzalcohuatl had not been like one of themselves. They
    described him as a white or pale faced man, of portly person, with
    broad forehead, great eyes, long black hair, and a heavy rounded
    beard. The Zapotecan Wixipecocha was also a white-skinned apostle,
    and the Toltecan Topilitzin is described as having all the same
    features, to which Duran adds that his beard was of a fair color
    and his nose rather large. He was very reserved in his manners,
    plain and meek with those who approached him, passing most of his
    time in meditation and prayer in his cell, and showing himself but
    seldom to the people. * * * * * * * * Very abstemious at all times,
    Topilitzen often observed long and rigorous fasts, practicing
    severe penances and even bloody self-chastisements, as is likewise
    stated of the homologous Quetzalcohuatl.

    De las Casas testifies that Quetzalcohuatl lived a most honest and
    chaste life; Sahagun, that he never married nor ever was in the
    company of a woman, except in the act of auricular confession.
    While, according to traditional report, he was born of a virgin
    mother. Herrea states that he remained a virgin himself. The
    Yucatec legends also notice the celibacy of Cukulcan and his
    general purity of morals. * * * Quetzalcohuatl is described as
    having worn during life, for the sake of modesty, a garment that
    reached down to his feet. * * * * * For shoes, Cukulcan wore
    sandals, walked along bare-headed; nor is it said that his mantle
    was, like that of his equivalent Wexipecocha, provided with a
    monk's cowl for head-gear. From the Mexican traditions we learn
    that Quetzalcohuatl, also, wore a cloak, which Bancroft calls a
    blanket over all, in one place, and a long white robe, in another;
    adding that, according to Gormara, it was decorated with crosses.

It would be impossible within the proposed limits of this work to
quote at length what has been written of this mysterious personage of
the western world; whose character and career in so many respects are
like that of the Hebrew Messiah, as he appeared in the western world.
From this point I can only summarize and quote briefly respecting him,
leaving the reader interested in the subject to make larger research in
the works cited in the margins. [25]

And now first as to the personal appearance of Quetzalcohuatl:

    He was a white man, of portly person, broad brow, great eyes, long
    black hair, and large round head, or exceedingly chaste, and quiet
    life, and of great moderation in all things. [26] * * * * * * * *
    Quetzalcohuatl is said to be a white man (some gave him a bright,
    red face), with a strong formation of body, broad forehead, large
    eyes, black hair, and a heavy beard. He always wore a long white
    robe; which, according to Gomara, was decorated with crosses. (J.
    G. Muller quoted by Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. III., pp. 273,

In the Book of Mormon account of the advent of Messiah among the
Nephites there is no description given of his features or person. This,
upon first thought, may seem singular; and yet it is in strictest
harmony with human conduct in the presence of such an event. Over-awed
by the fact of the presence of a heavenly personage men are liable to
take no note of features or color of the eyes or hair or any details
of personal appearance. It is not until men are removed from the
awe-inspiring circumstance itself that they begin to think of details
connected with a heavenly apparition. I think it probable, therefore,
that not until after the Nephite accounts were written of the personal
ministrations of Jesus did those who beheld him begin to think out the
details of his personal appearance; hence we have no description of him
in their written annals, but we find it preserved--but perhaps with
more or less of error in it--in the traditions of the people.

As to his general character while on earth the following is of

    This Quetzalcohuatl was god of the air, and as such had his temple,
    of a round shape and very magnificent. He was made god of the air
    for the mildness and gentleness of all his ways, not liking the
    sharp and harsh measures to which the other gods were so strongly
    inclined. It is to be said further that his life on earth was
    marked by intensely religious characteristics; not only was he
    devoted to the careful observance of all the old customary forms
    of worship, but he himself ordained and appointed many new rites,
    ceremonies, and festivals [27] for the adoration of the gods;
    [28] and it is held for certain that he made the calendar. [29]
    He had priests who were called Quequetzalcohua, that is to say
    "priests of the order of Quetzalcohuatl." [30] The memory of him
    was engraved deeply upon the minds of the people, and it is said
    that when barren women prayed and made sacrifices to him, children
    were given them. [31] He was, as we have said, god of the winds,
    and the power of causing them to blow was attributed to him as well
    as the power of calming or causing their fury to cease. It was said
    further that he swept the road, so that the gods called Tlaloques
    could rain; this the people imagined because ordinarily a month
    or more before the rains began there blew strong winds throughout
    all New Spain. Quetzalcohuatl is described as having worn during
    life, for the sake of modesty, garments that reached down to the
    feet, with a blanket over all, sown with red crosses. The Cholulans
    preserved certain green stones that had belonged to him, regarding
    them with great veneration and esteeming them as relics. * * * *
    * * He also arranged the calendar, and taught his subjects fit
    religious ceremonies; preaching specially against human sacrifices,
    and ordering offerings of fruits and flowers only. He would have
    nothing to do with the wars, even covering his ears when the
    subject was mentioned. His was a veritable golden age, as in the
    time of Saturn; animals and even men lived in peace, the soil
    produced the richest harvests without cultivation, and the grain
    grew so large that a man found it trouble enough to carry one ear;
    no cotton was dyed, as it grew of all colors, and fruits of all
    kinds abounded. Everybody was rich and Quetzalcohuatl owned whole
    palaces of gold, silver and precious stones. The air was filled
    with the most pleasant aromas, and a host of finely feathered birds
    filled the world with melody. [32]

So, too, the following:

    Only Quetzalcohuatl among all the gods was pre-eminently called
    Lord; in such sort, that when any one swore, saying, By our Lord,
    he meant Quetzalcohuatl and no other; though there were many other
    highly esteemed gods. For indeed the service of this god was
    gentle, neither did he demand hard things, but light; and he taught
    only virtue, abhorring all evil and hurt. Twenty years this good
    deity remained in Cholula, then he passed away by the road he had
    come, carrying with him four of the principal and most virtuous
    youths of that city. He journeyed for a hundred and fifty leagues,
    till he came to the sea, in a distant province called Goatzacoalco.
    Here he took leave of his companions and sent them back to their
    city, instructing them to tell their fellow citizens that a day
    should come in which the white men would land upon their coasts,
    by the way of the sea in which the sun rises; brethren of his and
    having beards like his; and that they should rule that land. [33]
    The Mexicans always waited for the accomplishment of this prophecy,
    and when the Spaniards came they took them for the descendants of
    their meek and gentle prophet, although, as Mendieta remarks with
    some sarcasm, when they came to know them and to experience their
    works, they thought otherwise. [34]

Relative to Quetzalcohuatl in his capacity of Deity I shall quote the
following passage from Lord Kingsborough's great work as representing
the sum of his extensive research upon the subject and its elaborate

    How truly surprising it is to find the Mexicans, who seem to
    have been quite unacquainted with the doctrines of the migration
    of the soul and the metempsychosis, should have believed in the
    incarnation of the only son of their supreme god Tonacatecutle.
    For Mexican mythology speaking of no other son of that God except
    Quetzalcohuatl, who was born of Chimalman, the virgin of Tula,
    without connection with man, and by his breath alone, (by which
    may be signified his word or his will, announced to Chimalman by
    word of mouth of the celestial messenger, whom he dispatched to
    inform her that she should conceive a son), it must be presumed
    that Quetzalcohuatl was his only son. [35] Other arguments might
    be adduced to show, that the Mexicans believed that Quetzalcohuatl
    was both god and man, that he had previously to his incarnation,
    existed from all eternity, [36] that he had created both the world
    and man, [37] that he descended from heaven to reform the world by
    penance, that he was born with the perfect use of reason, that he
    preached a new law, and, being king of Tula, was crucified for the
    sins of mankind, as is obscurely insinuated by the interpreter of
    the Vatican Codex, plainly declared in the traditions of Yucatan,
    and mysteriously represented in the Mexican paintings. [38]

    It would be a useless repetition of facts already stated in the
    preceding pages of the present volume, to undertake separately to
    prove all these points; and we shall confine ourselves in this
    place to the three first very important articles. The reflection
    must have suggested itself to those who have perused the New
    Testament, that Christ is as frequently distinguished there by
    the appellation of the "Son of Man," as by that of the "Son of
    God," in reference no doubt to his humanity, and to the famous
    prophecy contained in the ninth verse of the ninth chapter of
    Isaiah: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:"
    which Christians, on the authority of many passages in the four
    Gospels, apply to Christ, although the Jews some times interpret
    it of the Messiah, and some times of King Hezekiah. The Mexicans
    bestowed the appellation of Topilitzin on Quetzalcohuatl, the
    literal signification of which is "our son," or "our child,"
    the proper name being compounded of "to," "our," and "piltzin,"
    defined by Alonso de Molina in his rare and copious vocabulary of
    the Mexican and Spanish languages to be mino o nina, "a boy or a
    girl," and associated by him with the cognate terms of "piltontli"
    and "pilzintia;" and it may not be unreasonably assumed, since
    analogies, which are numerous and not isolated, as their number
    increases, increase also their ratio of probability, not only that
    the Mexicans were acquainted with Isaiah's famous prophecy, but to
    mark their belief of the accomplishment of that prophecy, in the
    person of Quetzalcohuatl, that they named him Topiltzin; no less
    account of his having been born from a virgin of the daughters of
    men, then because another equally celebrated prediction of the
    same prophet declared that he should receive a name from that very
    circumstance: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign,
    Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his
    name Immanuel." And the proper name Topilitzin does in fact bear
    a signification corresponding, if not literally, yet entirely in
    substance with that of Immanuel: since "God with us," which is the
    interpretation of the Hebrew name, means God domiciliated amongst
    men; and the full force of the expression is preserved in the term
    Topilitzin, which might be interpreted the Son of Man, or God on a
    level with men; for the Mexicans believed that Quetzalcohuatl took
    human nature upon him, partaking of all infirmities of man, and
    was not exempt from sorrow, pain, or death, and that he suffered
    voluntarily to atone for the sins of mankind. [39]

As already remarked, there is much attributed to this Deity of native
American tradition that seems incompatible with the character of
Messiah, and with his labors while in the western hemisphere; but for
all that one may see in outline here the leading truths respecting the
Son of God as made known to the Nephites through prophecies and the
Christ's advent among them, all of which is set forth in the Book of
Mormon; while that which is not congruous to Messiah and his mission to
the Nephites, results--as already pointed out--from the confusion of
a number of traditions concerning several other great characters who
have figured in native American history, and of whom the Book of Mormon
speaks. But, in the foregoing excerpts from the works of those skilled
in the lore of ancient America, we have the account of "The great or
the glorious Man of the country," [40] that can be no other than the
Hebrew Messiah--the Jesus Christ of the Book of Mormon. There are the
signs of his birth: the signs of his death; his sudden advent among the
people; his personal appearance--not incompatible with the personal
appearance of Messiah, but rather in harmony with it; his birth of a
virgin; his being the only son of God; his name signifying "God with
man;" his being the creator of heaven and earth; his crucifixion for
the sins of the world; his being peculiarly "the Lord" to whom men
prayed; his love of peace, his hatred of war; his respect for existing
religion, yet his enlargement of it and the addition of religious
rites and ceremonies; his teaching the people perfectly in their own
tongue, yet also in new and honied words; his compassion for the sick,
and healing them; his choosing special disciples to teach his religion
and making them priests of the same order as himself; the beauty and
gentleness of his religion that stands in such marked contrast to the
subsequent harsh and sanguinary superstition that darkened the lives of
the natives; his instructions as to historical records; his taking with
him on his departure from the country four of the principal and most
virtuous youths of the city of Cholula to the sea where he separated
from them and sent back messages to his followers by them, promising
to return; [41] his prediction of other and white races to come and
occupy the western world and rule it; his mysterious departure from the
land, and his promise to return. All this, which so perfectly agrees
both with the character and ministry of Messiah among the Nephites,
as described in the Book of Mormon, is set forth in such clearness
that it cannot be discredited because of some evident fantasies and
incongruities in other parts of the traditions.


1. III. Nephi xi: 3-12.

2. Native Races, Bancroft, Vol. V., pp. 23, 24.

3. Such was the case with I Nephi and also Mosiah II. (Omni v: 12-22).
Also King Benjamin, (Mosiah i: 2). In fact all the Nephite kings seem
to have performed priestly functions; while under the Republic Alma
was made president of the state and high priest of the Church, (Mosiah
xxix: 42), and in the fifty-third year of the Republic Nephi, the son
of Helaman, was, for a time, both president of the Republic and high
priest of the Church. (Helaman iii: 37 and chapter iv.)

4. The Mexicans believed that Quetzalcohuatl united in his own person
the character of king, priest and prophet. (Kingsborough, Vol. VI.,
p. 213). Prescott speaking of Montezuma says: "He had been elected
to the regal dignity in preference to his brothers for his several
qualification both as a ruler and a priest, a combination of offices
sometimes found in the Mexican candidates, as it was, more frequently,
in the Egyptian." (Conquest of Mexico, Vol. I., p. 215). The same
author speaking of the Incas of Peru says: "As the representative of
the sun he stood at the head of the priesthood and presided at the
most important of the religious festivals." (Conquest of Peru, Vol.
I., p. 41). In a note on this passage Mr. Prescott takes exception to
what he calls the "sweeping assertion" of Carli to the effect that
the royal and sacerdotal authority were blended together in Peru; yet
in another passage Prescott himself compares the ancient Peruvian
government with that of the Jews and says: "The Inca was both the law
giver and the law. He was not merely the representative of divinity, or
like the pope, its vicegerant, but he was divinity itself." (Conquest
of Peru, Vol. I., p. 135). Tschudi emphatically states the union of
king and priest in the Incas as follows: "Moreover, the monarchs of
Peru, as children of the sun, and descendants, in a direct line, from
Manco-Capac, were the high priests and oracles in religious matters.
Thus uniting the legislative and executive power, the supreme command
in war, absolute sovereignity in peace, and a venerated high priesthood
in religious feasts, they exercised the highest power ever known to
man--realized in their persons the famous union of the pope and the
emperor, and more reasonably than Louis XIV., might have exclaimed: "I
am the state!" (Peruvian Antiquities, Tschudi, pp. 74, 75).

5. Alma xlv: 18, 19.

6. III. Nephi i: 1-3.

7. Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 27, 28. Our author here follows Claviergo.

8. The chronology of legends, or even traditions, is very uncertain;
and the variation of a few hundred years or so is not serious. The main
point in the above case is that Votan came to America some hundreds of
years B. C.

9. Of Lehi's family there were himself and wife, and four sons. Zoram,
the servant of Laban; he married one of the daughters of Ishmael. Of
Ishmael's family there was himself and wife, two married sons and five
daughters. If, as it is supposed, the four sons of Lehi married the
four daughters of Ishmael then there were nine families that formed
the colony. Ishmael, however, died during the colony's wanderings in
Arabia, and hence there were eight families that reached America in the
Nephite colony. (For above facts see I. Nephi ii, vi, vii, xvi: 34).

10. I. Nephi ii.

11. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., p. 166.

12. I. Nephi i, and I. Nephi ii.

13. Those who would have further information concerning Votan are
referred to Bancroft's Native Races, Vol. III., pp. 450, 455. Also Vol.
V., pp. 159, 160. Also to Donnelley's Atlantis, chapter iv, and the
past notes in these several works.

14. Mexican Antiquities, Kingsborough, Vol. VI., p. 419.

15. III. Nephi xvii: 7, 9.

16. III. Nephi xvii: 15-17.

17. III. Nephi xxiii.

18. III. Nephi xvii: 4, see also chapter xvi: 1-3.

19. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., p. 621.

20. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. III., pp. 135, 260, 451

21. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., p. 25

22. Those who desire to follow the researches of the noble author on
this point can do so by consulting Vol. VIII. of his elaborate work,
pp. 5-51; also his explanations of plates 3, 10, 41 of the Vatican
Codex with accompanying notes, Vol. VI. This is by no means all that
his lordship writes upon the subject, but from these passages one
may learn the substance of his theory, and the argument by which he
sustains it.

23. Conquest of Mexico, Prescott, Vol. I., p. 64.

24. History of America Before Columbus, P. De Roo, Vol. I., pp. 540-544.

25. Perhaps the fullest and most accessible work on the subject is
Bancroft's Native Races, Vol. III., pp. 248, 287; and P. De Roo's
America Before Columbus, Vol. I., chapters xxii, xxiii.

26. Native Races, Bancroft, Vol. III., p. 250.

27. See II. Nephi xv: 2, 10.

28. See III. Nephi xi: 21, 28, also III. Nephi xviii: 1, 25. Compare
these several passages from Nephi with the statement in the text.

29. This may simply be the traditional remembrance of the fact that the
sign of the birth of Jesus was made an epoch from which the Nephites
thenceforward reckoned their time. See III. Nephi ii: 4-8.

30. "Priests after the order of Quetzalcohuatl." The Book of Mormon
teaches that the Nephites had the high Melchizedek priesthood among
them. That is to say, the priesthood of their high priests was after
the same order of priesthood as that held by the son of God. Hence
we have Alma saying: "I am called to speak after this manner [he was
preaching obedience to the people] according to the holy order of God,
which is in Christ Jesus. * * * * * And now I say unto you that this
is the order after which I am called, yea to preach unto my beloved
brethren." (Alma v: 44, 49). "I would that ye should remember that the
Lord God ordained priests after his holy order, which was after the
order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people." (Alma xii:
1). The whole chapter deals with this subject of the priesthood, and
should be considered as part of the reference. Jesus when instructing
the twelve he had chosen from among the Nephites, said to them: "Ye
shall be judges of this people according to the judgement which I shall
give unto you, which shall be just; therefore what manner of men ought
ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am." (III. Nephi xxvii:
27). It is fairly clear, that Jesus appointed priests after his own
order even as the traditions of the Mexicans teach that their deity
Quetzalcohuatl appointed priests after his own order. The coincident of
the tradition and the Nephite record is remarkable, and affords an item
of incidental evidence of considerable importance.

31. Compare this statement with the following passage: "Behold, verily,
verily, I say unto you, ye must watch and pray always, lest ye enter
into temptation. * * * * * Therefore ye must always pray unto the
Father in my name; and whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name,
which is right, believing that ye shall receive, behold it shall be
given unto you. Pray in your families unto the Father, always in my
name, that your wives and your children may be blessed." (III. Nephi
xviii: 12, 21).

32. Native Races, Bancroft, Vol. III., pp. 259, 260, 274. For a
description of the Nephite "golden age," whence comes this "golden age"
of the tradition, see III. Nephi, chapter xxiv, xxviii.

33. With this statement compare III. Nephi xvi: 6, 16; also III. Nephi
xx: 14, 20, 27, 28; also III. Nephi xxi: 12, 25. Where the Savior
predicts the coming of the Gentiles to the promised land, and their
privileges and responsibilities respecting it.

34. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. III., p. 251.

35. Compare I. Nephi xi: 12-21; I. Nephi x: 4-6. Also I. Nephi xi: 21;
Ether iii: 6-16.

36. Mosiah iii: 4, 5.

37. Helaman xiv: 12; Ether iii: 14-16.

38. III Nephi xi: 6-12.

39. Kingsborough's Mexican Antiquities, Vol. VI., p. 507.

40. The happy suggestion of title is De Roo's Ante, p. 298.

41. Readers of the Book of Mormon will find in this circumstance a
resemblance to the fact of Jesus granting to three of the twelve
disciples chosen from among the Nephites the privilege of remaining on
earth without tasting death until he should return in glory. And when
it is remembered that in granting this request to the three Nephites
Jesus coupled the name of John, the beloved disciple, in Judea, to whom
had been granted the same privilege (St. John xxi), sufficient ground
work was laid for the tradition of the "four" "most virtuous youths"
who were given a special mission by Quetzalcohuatl to his followers.
The incident concerning the three Nephite disciples and the mention of
John in connection with them will be found in III. Nephi xxviii.



I next call attention to the evidences of the Hebrew origin of the
native Americans, which origin, of course, if established beyond
reasonable doubt, will be one more item of evidence--one, too, of very
great weight in the volume of cumulative evidence here being compiled,
since the Hebrew origin of the native American races is fundamental
as testimony to the truth of the Book of Mormon. The Hebrew origin of
those races in our book is so unequivocally stated and so emphasized
that if the said American races could be proven beyond doubt to be of
other than Hebrew origin, the claims of the Book of Mormon would be

The chief sources of information on this subject are the writings of
Gregoria Garcia, Edward King (Lord Kingsborough), and James Adair. The
first is a Spanish Dominican author, born about 1560; he died 1627. He
spent some twelve years in Central American countries as a missionary
among the natives, during which time he gathered his materials for his
chiefest work, "Origin de los Indios." While contending for the theory
that the Indians are descendants of the Ten Tribes, Garcia collected
evidences on both sides of the question, though both his evidences and
arguments tend to prove the theory of Hebrew origin.

Lord Kingsborough was born in 1795, and died at Dublin in 1837. His
"Antiquities of Mexico," ten volumes, imperial folio, were published in
London between 1830-48, consequently, since he died in 1837, some of
the volumes were issued after his death. His theory is that the Indians
are descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel, and to the establishment
of this view he bends all his energies. He is open to the charge of
being over zealous for his theory, and doubtless has been somewhat
extravagant in his assumptions of proofs--in matters of detail, at
least; but, after all proper discount is made for the over-zeal of an
enthusiast--fanatic, if you will,--there remains a body of evidence
in his works for the Hebrew origin of native American races which has
never been successfully disposed of by those who dispute his theory.
Even Bancroft, who holds his theory in contempt, is forced to admit
that his "enthusiasm is never offensive," and further says of him,
"There is a scholarly dignity about his work which has never been
attained by those who have jeered and railed at him." [1]

Adair's work, "History of the North American Indians," is included in
the eighth volume of Kingsborough's works. James Adair was an English
trader among the North American Indians from 1735 to 1775--forty years.
It was in 1775 that his work was published. His observations were
confined to the North American Indians; hence these three authors may
be said to cover the entire field of our investigation. I shall give
extracts from all these writers, making use of Bancroft's abridgment of
their works as being at once accurate and most accessible to the reader.



I begin with Garcia:

    The opinion that the Americans are of Hebrew origin is supported by
    similarities in character, dress, religion, physical peculiarities,
    condition, and customs. The Americans are at heart cowardly, and
    so are the Jews; the history of both nations proves this. The Jews
    did not believe in the miracles of Christ, and for their unbelief
    were scattered over the face of the earth, and despised of all
    men; in like manner the people of the New World did not readily
    receive the true faith as preached by Christ's Catholic disciples,
    and are therefore persecuted and being rapidly exterminated.
    Another analogy presents itself in the ingratitude of the Jews for
    the many blessings and special favors bestowed on them by God.
    * * * * * * Both Jews and Americans are noted for their want of
    charity and kindness to the poor, sick and unfortunate; both are
    naturally given to idolatry; many customs are common to both such
    as raising the hands to heaven when making a solemn affirmation,
    calling all near relatives brothers, showing great respect and
    humility before superiors, burying their dead on hills and high
    places without the city, tearing their clothing on the reception
    of bad tidings, giving a kiss on the cheek as a token of peace,
    celebrating a victory with songs and dances, casting out of the
    place of worship women who are barren, drowning dogs in a well,
    practicing crucifixion. * * * * * * * * The dress of the Hebrew
    was in many points like that of the Americans. * * * * * * The
    Jews preferred the flesh-pots of Egypt and a life of bondage to
    heavenly manna and the promised land; the Americans liked a life of
    freedom and a diet of roots and herbs, better than the service of
    the Spaniards with good food. The Jews were famous for fine work
    in stone, as is shown by the buildings of Jerusalem, and a similar
    excellence in this art is seen in the American ruins. The Mexicans
    have a tradition of a journey undertaken at the command of a god,
    and continued for a long time under the direction of certain high
    priests, who miraculously obtained supplies for their support, this
    bears a striking resemblance to the Hebrew story of the wandering
    in the desert. [2] * * * * Moreover, many traces of their old laws
    and ceremonies are to be found among them at the present day.
    For instance, both Jews and Americans gave their temple into the
    charge of priests, burned incense, anointed the body, practiced
    circumcision, kept perpetual fires on their altars, forbade women
    to enter the temple immediately after giving birth, and husbands
    to sleep with their wives for seven days during the period of
    menstruation, prohibiting marriage or sexual intercourse between
    relatives within the second degree, made fornication with a slave
    punishable, slew the adulterer, made it unlawful for a man to dress
    like a woman, or a woman like a man, put away their brides if they
    prove to have lost their virginity, kept the ten commandments.

Answering the objection that the American Indians do not speak Hebrew,
Garcia says:

    But the reason for this is that the language has gradually changed,
    as has been the case with all tongues. Witness the Hebrew spoken
    by the Jews at the present time, which is much corrupted and very
    different from what is originally was. There do actually exist,
    besides, many Hebraic traces in the American languages. [3]


_Lord Kingsborough's Views._

The main items of Lord Kingsborough's evidences and arguments are thus
summarized by Bancroft:

    The religion of the Mexicans strongly resembled that of the Jews,
    in many minor details, as will be presently seen, and the two were
    practically alike, to a certain extent in their very foundation;
    for, as the Jews acknowledged a multitude of angels, arch-angels,
    principalities, thrones, dominions, and powers, as the subordinate
    personages of their hierarchy, so did the Mexicans acknowledge
    the unity of the deity in the person of Tezcatlipoca, and at the
    same time worship a great number of other imaginary beings. Both
    believed in a plurality of devils subordinate to one head, who was
    called by the Mexicans Mictlantecutli, and by the Jews Satan. * *
    * * * * It is probable that the Toltecs were acquainted with the
    sin of the first man committed at the suggestion of the woman,
    herself deceived by the serpent, who tempted her with the fruit of
    the forbidden tree, who was the origin of all our calamities, and
    by whom death came into the world. We have seen in this chapter
    that Kingsborough supposes the Messiah and his story to have
    been familiar to the Mexicans. There is reason to believe that
    the Mexicans, like the Jews, offered meat and drink offerings
    to stones. There are striking similarities between the Babel,
    flood, and creation myths of the Hebrews and the Americans. Both
    Jews and Mexicans were fond of appealing in their adjurations to
    the heaven and the earth. Both were extremely superstitious, and
    firm believers in prodigies. * * * * It is very probable that the
    Sabbath of the seventh day was known in some parts of America.
    The Mexicans applied the blood of sacrifices to the same uses as
    the Jews; they poured it upon the earth, they sprinkled it, they
    marked persons with it, and they smeared it upon walls and other
    inanimate things. No one but the Jewish high priest might enter the
    Holy of Holies. A similar custom obtained in Peru. Both Mexicans
    and Jews regarded certain animals as unclean and unfit for food.
    Some of the Americans believed with some of the Talmudists in a
    plurality of souls. That man was created in the image of God was
    a part of the Mexican belief. It was customary among the Mexicans
    to eat the flesh of sacrifices of atonement. There are many points
    of resemblance between Tezcatlipoca and Jehovah. Ablutions formed
    an essential part of the ceremonial law of the Jews and Mexicans.
    The opinions of the Mexicans with regard to the resurrection of the
    body, accorded with those of the Jews. The Mexican temple, like the
    Jewish, faced the east. "As amongst the Jews the ark was a sort of
    portable temple in which the deity was supposed to be continually
    present, and which was accordingly borne on the shoulders of the
    priests as a sure refuge and defense from their enemies, so amongst
    the Mexicans and the Indians of Michoacan and Honduras an ark was
    held in the highest veneration, and was considered an object too
    sacred to be touched by any but the priests. * * * * * The Yucatec
    conception of a trinity resembles the Hebrews. It is probable that
    Quetzalcohuatl whose proper name signifies "feathered serpent,"
    was so called after the brazen serpent which Moses lifted up in
    the wilderness, the feathers perhaps alluding to the rabbinical
    tradition that the fiery serpents which god sent against the
    Israelites were of a winged species. The Mexicans, like the Jews,
    saluted the four cardinal points, in their worship. There was much
    in connection with sacrifices that was common to Mexicans and Jews.
    * * * * * * In various religious rites and observances, such as
    circumcision, confession, and communion, there was much similarity.
    Salt was an article highly esteemed by the Mexicans, and the Jews
    always offered it in their oblations. Among the Jews, the firstling
    of an ass had to be redeemed with a lamb, or if unredeemed, its
    neck was broken. This command of Moses should be considered in
    reference to the custom of sacrificing children which existed in
    Mexico and Peru. The spectacle of a king performing a dance as an
    act of religion was witnessed by the Jews as well as by Mexicans.
    As the Israelites were conducted from Egypt by Moses and Aaron who
    were accompanied by their sister Miriam, so the Aztecs departed
    from Astlan under the guidance of Huitziton and Tecpatzin, the
    former of whom is named by Acosta and Herrera, Mexi, attended
    likewise by their sister Quilaztli, or, as she is otherwise named,
    Chimalman or Malinalli, both of which latter names have some
    resemblance to Miriam, as Mexi has to Moses. * * * * * * * It is
    impossible, on reading what Mexican mythology records of the war
    in heaven and of the fall of Tzontemoc and the other rebellious
    spirits; of the creation of light by the word of Tonacatecutli, and
    of the division of the waters; of the sin of Ytztlacoliuhqui, and
    his blindness and nakedness; of the temptation of Suchiquecal, and
    her disobedience in gathering roses from a tree, and the consequent
    misery and disgrace of herself and her posterity--not to recognize
    scriptural analogies. Other Hebrew analogies Lord Kingsborough
    finds in America, in the dress, insignia, and duties of priests;
    in innumerable superstitions concerning dreams, apparitions,
    eclipses, and other more common-place events; in certain festivals
    for rain; in burial and mourning ceremonies; in the diseases most
    common among the people; in certain regularly observed festivals;
    in the dress of certain nations; in established laws; in physical
    features; in architecture; in various minor observances, such as
    offering water to a stranger that he might wash his feet, eating
    dust in token of humility, anointing with oil, and so forth; in
    the sacrifice of prisoners; in manner and style of oratory; in
    the stories of giants; in respect paid to God's name; in games
    of chance; in marriage relations; in childbirth ceremonies; in
    religious ideas of all sorts; in respect paid to kings; in uses of
    metals; in treatment of criminals, and punishment of crimes; in
    charitable practices; in social customs; and in a vast number of
    other particulars. [4]


_Adair's Evidences._

Following is the summary of Adair's evidences and arguments:

    The Israelites were divided into tribes and had chiefs over them,
    so the Indians divided themselves: each tribe forming a little
    community within the nation. And as the nation hath its particular
    symbol, so from nation to nation among them we shall not find one
    individual who doth not distinguish himself by his family name.
    Every town has a state house or synedrion, the same as the Jewish
    Sanhedrim, where almost every night the head men meet to discuss
    public business. The Hebrew nation were ordered to worship Jehovah
    the true and living God, who by the Indians is styled Yohewah. The
    ancient heathens, it is well known worshiped a plurality of gods:
    but these American Indians pay their religious devoir to Loak
    Ishtohoollo Aba, The Great Beneficent Supreme Holy Spirit of Fire.
    They do not pay the least perceptible adoration to images. Their
    ceremonies in their religious worship accord more nearly with the
    Mosaic institutions, which could not be if they were of heathen
    descent. * * * * * Their opinion that God chose them out of all the
    rest of mankind as his peculiar and beloved people, fills both the
    white Jew and the red American, with that steady hatred against
    all the world, which renders them hated and despised by all. We
    have abundant evidence of the Jews believing in the ministration
    of angels, during the Old Testament dispensation, their frequent
    appearances and their services on earth, are recorded in the
    oracles, which the Jews themselves receive as given by divine
    inspiration, and St. Paul in his epistle addressed to the Hebrews
    speaks of it as their general opinion that "angels are ministering
    spirits to the good and righteous on earth." The Indian sentiments
    and traditions are the same. They believe the higher regions to
    be inhabited by good spirits, relations to the Great Holy One,
    and that these spirits attend and favor the virtuous. The Indian
    language and dialects appear to have the very idiom and genius of
    the Hebrew. Their words and sentences are expressive, concise,
    emphatical, sonorous, and bold, and often both in letters and
    signification synonymous with the Hebrew language. They count time
    after the manner of the Hebrews, reckoning years by lunar months
    like the Israelites who counted by moons. The religious ceremonies
    of the Indian Americans are in conformity with those of the Jews,
    they having their prophets, high priest, and others of religious
    order. As the Jews had a sanctorum or most holy place, so have all
    the Indian nations. The dress also of their high priests is similar
    in character to that of the Hebrews. The festivals, feasts, and
    religious rites of the Indian Americans have also great resemblance
    to that of the Hebrews. The Indian imitates the Israelite in
    his religious offerings. The Hebrews had various ablutions and
    anointings according to the Mosaic ritual--and all the Indian
    nations constantly observe similar customs from religious motives.
    Their frequent bathing, or dipping themselves and their children
    in rivers, even in the severest weather, seems to be as truly
    Jewish as the other rites and ceremonies which have been mentioned.
    The Indian laws of uncleanliness and purification, and also the
    abstaining from things deemed unclean are the same as those of
    the Hebrews. The Indian marriages, divorces and punishments of
    adultery, still retain a strong likeness to the Jewish laws and
    customs on these points. Many of the Indian punishments resemble
    those of the Jews. Whoever attentively views the features of the
    Indian, and his eye and reflects on his fickle, obstinate, and
    cruel disposition will naturally think of the Jews. The ceremonies
    performed by the Indians before going to war, such as purification
    and fasting, are similar to those of the Hebrew nation. The
    Israelites were fond of wearing beads and other ornaments, even as
    early as the patriarchal age and in resemblance to these customs
    the Indian females continually wear the same, believing it to be
    a preventive against many evils. The Indian manner of curing the
    sick is very similar to that of the Jews. Like the Hebrews, they
    firmly believe that diseases and wounds are occasioned by divine
    anger, in proportion to some violation of the old beloved speech.
    The Hebrews carefully buried their dead, so on any accident they
    gathered their bones, and laid them in tombs of their forefathers;
    thus all the numerous nations of Indians perform the like friendly
    office to every deceased person of their respective tribes. The
    Jewish records tell us that the women mourned for the loss of their
    deceased husbands, and were reckoned vile by the civil law if they
    married in the space of at least ten months after their death. In
    the same manner all the Indian widows, by an established strict
    penal law, mourn for the loss of their deceased husbands; and among
    some tribes for the space of three or four years. The surviving
    brother by the Mosaic law, was to raise seed to a deceased brother,
    who left a widow childless, to perpetuate his name and family. The
    American law enforces the same rule. When the Israelites gave names
    to their children or others they chose such appellatives as suited
    best their circumstances and the times. This custom is a standing
    rule with the Indians." [5]

There are writers upon the subject of American Antiquities who hold,
first: that not all the foregoing points of comparison between native
American races and the Hebrews are clearly established; and second:
that if they were all clearly established it would not necessarily
prove identity of race. This much, however, can be insisted upon by
those who accept the Book of Mormon as true; namely, that since no
counter theory of origin for our native American races has yet been
conclusively proven, (and as matters now stand, seems impossible of
being proven), and as the Book of Mormon makes bold to so definitely
announce the Hebrew origin of the people whose history in outline
it gives, so much in the foregoing summary of points of comparison
between the American races and the Hebrews as may not be successfully
contradicted stands as evidence of no mean order for the truth of our
Nephite record.

The Discovery of Hebrew Relics.

In addition to these summaries of evidence on the Hebrew origin of the
native American races there are several special discoveries bearing on
the subject that I think should be mentioned. One is related by Ethan
Smith, author of "Views of the Hebrews," a work in which he undertakes
to prove that the American Indians are descendants of the Ten Lost
Tribes of Israel. While preparing his work for a second edition, he
heard of the discovery in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, of a parchment,
supposed to be of native American origin, covered with Hebrew
characters. Mr. Smith went to Pittsfield to investigate the matter, and
found the facts to be as follows, the information being given by the
man who found the parchment:


_The Pittsfield Hebrew Parchment._

    This [the discoverer of the parchment] was Joseph Merrick, Esq.,
    a highly respectable character in the church of Pittsfield, and
    in the county, as the minister of the place informed [me]. Mr.
    Merrick 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, (a place in Pittsfield, so called,
    and lying, as the writer was afterward informed, at some distance
    from the middle of the town where Mr. Merrick is now [about 1825]
    living). He ploughed and conveyed away old chips and earth, to
    some depth, as the surface of the earth appeared uneven. After the
    work was done, walking over the place, he discovered, near where
    the earth had been dug the deepest, a kind of black strap, about
    six inches in length, and one and a half in breadth, and something
    thicker than a draw leather [tug] of a harness. He perceived it had
    at each end a loop of some hard substance, probably for the purpose
    of carrying it. He conveyed it into his house, and threw it in an
    old tool box. He afterward found it thrown out of doors, and again
    conveyed it to the box. He attempted to cut it open, and found it
    was formed of pieces of thick raw hide, sewed and made water tight
    with the sinews of some animal; and in the fold it contained four
    folded leaves of old parchment. These leaves were of a dark yellow,
    and contained some kind of writing. Some of the neighbors saw and
    examined them. One of these parchments they tore in pieces; the
    other three he saved, and delivered them to Mr. Sylvester Larned,
    a graduate then in town, who took them to Cambridge, and had them
    examined. They were written in Hebrew with a pen, in plain and
    intelligible writing. The following is an extract of a letter sent
    to Mr. Merrick by Mr. Larned, upon this subject:

    Sir:--I have examined the parchment manuscript, which you had the
    goodnesss to give me. After some time and with much difficulty and
    assistance I have ascertained their meaning, which is as follows:
    (I have numbered the manuscripts.)

    No. 1, is translated by Duet. vi: 4-9 verses inclusive.

    No. 2, by Deut, xi: 13-21 verses inclusive.

    No. 3, Exod. xiii: 11-16 verses inclusive.

    I am, etc. [Signed] SYLVESTER LARNED. [6]


_The Newark Hebrew Tablet._

Another discovery of Hebrew writing--the Ten Commandments engraved on a
stone tablet--was made in Ohio; and was seen by Mr. A. A. Bancroft, the
father of H. H. Bancroft, author of "Native Races." The latter relates
the circumstances of finding this relic as follows:

    About eight miles southeast of Newark there was formerly a large
    mound composed of masses of free stone, which had been brought from
    some distance and thrown into a heap without much placing or care.
    In early days, stone being scarce in that region, the settlers
    carried away the mound piece by piece to use for building purposes,
    so that in a few years there was little more than a large flattened
    heap of rubbish remaining. Some fifteen years ago, the county
    surveyor (I have forgotten his name), who had for some time been
    searching ancient works, turned his attention to this particular
    pile. He employed a number of men and proceeded at once to open
    it. Before long he was rewarded by finding in the centre and near
    the surface a bed of the tough clay generally known as pipe-clay,
    which must have been brought from a distance of some twelve miles.
    Imbedded in the clay was a coffin, dug out of a burr-oak log,
    and in a pretty good state of preservation. In the coffin was a
    skeleton, with quite a number of stone ornaments and emblems, and
    some open brass rings, suitable for bracelets or anklets. These
    being removed, they dug down deeper, and soon discovered a stone
    dressed to an oblong shape, about eighteen inches long and twelve
    wide, which proved to be a casket, neatly fitted and completely
    water-tight, containing a slab of stone of hard and fine quality,
    and an inch and a half thick, eight inches long, four inches wide
    at one end, and tapering to three inches at the other. Upon the
    face of the slab was the figure of a man, apparently a priest with
    a long flowing beard, and a robe reaching to his feet. Over his
    head was a curved line of characters, and upon the edges and back
    of the stone closely and neatly carved letters. The slab, which I
    saw myself, was shown to the Episcopalian clergyman of Newark, and
    he pronounced the writings to be the Ten Commandments in ancient
    Hebrew. [7]

Mr. Bancroft, referring to these circumstances, says that in neither of
them "is it certain or even probable that the relic existed in America
before the conquest," though he gives no reason for the rather dogmatic
statement. For my own part, and especially in the latter case, I see
no reason to doubt the existence of these relics in America before the
advent of the Spaniards. According to the Book of Mormon the ancient
inhabitants of America, the Nephites, had the writings of Moses. The
Ten Commandments were regarded as the summing up, the crystallization
of the law of God [8] to the people, pending the advent of Messiah
with the more perfect law of the gospel. What could be more natural
than that they should multiply copies of these scriptures, or parts
of them, especially such parts as related to particular promises or
warnings to Israelites, as do the passages on the parchment found
in Pittsfield, Massachusetts? Or such summaries of the law of Moses
as the Ten Commandments constitute? That the Nephites did multiply
copies of the scriptures they had in their possession (and doubtless
also copies of striking passages of those scriptures) is evident from
what is said upon the subject by Mormon when giving an account of
the transfer of the Nephite records from one Shiblon to Helaman, the
son of Helaman: "Now, behold, all those engravings which were in the
possession of Helaman, were written and sent forth among the children
of men throughout all the land, save it were those parts which had been
commanded by Alma should not go forth." [9]

The part here prohibited transcription and circulation related to the
oaths and constitutions of the secret societies from the record of the
Jaredites; [10] but for the rest, there was perfect liberty to multiply
copies of the scriptures, and that it was done is further evidenced
from the fact that missionaries from the Nephites to the Lamanites are
found to be in possession of copies of the scriptures which Lehi's
colony brought with them from Jerusalem, and from which they read for
the instruction of their hearers. [11] It is not difficult to believe,
in the light of these facts, that noted personages among native
Americans should have engraved on stone or parchment in Hebrew or in
other characters passages of the holy scriptures; nor is it incredible
that these should be buried with them--since to bury one's personal
effects with him was a custom of the natives--and that afterwards the
relics should be discovered as in the two instances cited. The fact
of the discoveries is beyond question: the nature of them is strong
incidental proof of the claims of the Book of Mormon.

Of this Newark discovery, the late Orson Pratt, who examined the
engraved stone in the city of New York, and which at the time was
in possession of the "Ethnological Society" of that city, makes
the following very valuable and convincing statement and argument
respecting the find. It should also be remembered that Elder Pratt's
knowledge of the Hebrew language makes his comments all the more
conclusive; while the fact that he points out in his statement that
there is in this Newark Tablet none of the modern "points" and
"characters" that have been introduced into the Hebrew "during the last
two thousand four hundred years," proves conclusively that the Newark
Tablet is an ancient, not a modern production.

    Thirty years after the Book of Mormon was put in print, giving the
    history of the settlement of this country, one of the great mounds
    south of the great lakes near Newark, in Ohio, was opened. What
    was found in it? A great many curiosities, among which were some
    copper pieces, supposed to be money. After digging down many feet,
    and carrying off many thousand loads of stone, they at length found
    a coffin in the midst of a hard kind of fire clay. Underneath this
    they found a large stone that appeared to be hollow; something
    seemed to rattle inside of it. The stone was cemented together
    in the middle, but with some little exertion they broke it open,
    when another stone was found inside of it, of a different nature
    entirely from its covering. On the stone taken from the inside was
    carved the figure of a man with a priestly robe flowing from his
    shoulders; and over the head of this man were the Hebrew characters
    for "Moshe," the ancient name of Moses; while on each side of this
    likeness, and on different sides of the stone, above, beneath, and
    around about were the Ten Commandments that were received on Mount
    Sinai, written in the ancient Hebrew characters. Now recollect
    that the Book of Mormon had been in print thirty years before this
    discovery. And what does this discovery prove? It proves that
    the builders of these mounds, south of the great lakes in the
    great Mississippi Valley in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, New York,
    etc., must have understood the Hebrew characters; [12] and not
    only that, but they must also have understood the law of Moses.
    Otherwise how happened it that they should write on this stone
    the Ten Commandments almost verbatim as they are now contained in
    King James's translation of the Bible. It proves that the builders
    of these mounds were Israelites, and that their illustrious dead,
    buried in these mounds, had these commandments buried with them
    in accordance with the custom of many of the ancient nations,
    especially the Egyptians, who were in the habit of consigning their
    written sacred papyrus to their great tombs. In Egypt many of these
    ancient manuscripts have been exhumed and, in many instances,
    pretended to be translated. So the Israelites followed the customs
    of these Eastern nations, and buried that which they considered
    most sacred, namely, the Ten Commandments, thundered by the voice
    of the Almighty in the midst of flaming fire on Mount Sinai in the
    ears of all the congregation of Israel.

    I have seen that sacred stone. It is not a hatched up story. I
    heard tell of it [the stone] as being in the Antiquarian Society,
    or rather, as it is now called, the Ethnological Society, in the
    City of New York. I went to the Secretary of that Society, and he
    kindly showed me this stone, of which I have been speaking, and
    being acquainted with modern Hebrew, I could form some kind of
    an estimate of the ancient Hebrew, for some of the modern Hebrew
    characters do not vary much in form from the ancient Hebrew. At
    any rate we have enough of ancient Hebrew, that has been dug up in
    Palestine and taken from among the ruins of the Israelites east
    of the Miditerranean Sea, to form some kind of an estimate of the
    characters, and comparing them, I could see and understand the
    nature of the writings upon these records. They were also taken to
    the most learned men of our country, who, as soon as they looked at
    them, were able to pronounce them to be not only ancient Hebrew,
    but they were also able to translate them and pronounced them to be
    the Ten Commandments. This, then, is external proof, independent of
    the Scriptural proofs to which I have alluded, in testimony of the
    divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

    Now, our modern Hebrew has many points; it has also many
    additional characters that have been made since these colonies
    left Jerusalem. Do you find on these ancient writings any of these
    modern characters that have been introduced during the last two
    thousand four hundred years? Not one. Do you find any Hebrew points
    representing vowels? Not one; and all the new consonants that have
    been introduced during the last two thousand four hundred years
    were not found upon this stone to which I have referred, showing
    plainly that it must have been of very ancient date. [13]

In connection with his comments on this Newark Tablet Elder Pratt also
makes the following statement:


    Five years after the discovery of this remarkable memento of the
    ancient Israelites on the American continent, [the Newark Tablet],
    and thirty-five years after the Book of Mormon was in print,
    several other mounds in the same vicinity of Newark were opened,
    in several of which Hebrew characters were found. Among them was
    this beautiful expression, buried with one of their ancient dead,
    "May the Lord have mercy on me a Nephite." It was translated a
    little differently, viz., "Nephel." Now we well know that Nephi,
    who came out of Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ, was
    the leader of the first Jewish [Israelitish--Lehi's colony was
    made up of families from the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim. See
    Vol. I., pages 167-8.] colony across to this land, and the people,
    ever afterwards, were called "Nephites," after their inspired
    prophet and leader. The Nephites were a righteous people and had
    many prophets among them; and when they were burying one of their
    brethren in these ancient mounds, they introduced the Hebrew
    characters signifying "May the Lord have mercy on me, a Nephite."
    This is another direct evidence of the divine authenticity of
    the Book of Mormon, which was brought forth and translated by
    inspiration some thirty-five years before this inscription was
    found. [14]


1. Native Races, Vol. V., p. 84.

2. But, it might be suggested, more closely resembles the story of
Lehi's colony at its departure from Jerusalem and its journey to

3. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 79-83.

4. Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91.

5. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 91, 92, 93 and notes.

6. View of the Hebrews; or the Tribes of Israel in America, pp. 219,
220. The above account is also quoted by Josiah Priest, American
Antiquities, pp. 68, 69. Also by Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., pp.
93, 94.

7. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 94, 95.

8. See especially the teachings of the prophet Abinadi in Mosiah,
chapter xii and xiii, where the Ten Commandments are expounded as the
sum of the law of Moses, and its relation to the whole plan of God for
the salvation of men defined.

9. Alma lxiii: 12. Orson Pratt in a foot note on the passage suggests:
"Those innumerous copies of sacred books were undoubtedly transcribed
directly from or compared with, the records on the original metallic

10. See Alma xxxvii.

11. Alma xii: 12-15; xxiii: 4-5; xxxiii: 12-15.

12. It may be objected that this Newark Tablet with the Ten
Commandments written upon it in ancient Hebrew, can be of no value
as evidence for the Book of Mormon, since that book was engraved in
characters called "reformed Egyptian." That is to say, it was written
in Egyptian characters somewhat altered by the Nephites in the course
of time--such changes take place in all written languages. But the
Nephites also wrote, to a limited extent, at least (and it would
most probably be in such cases as making a transcript of the Ten
Commandments), in Hebrew (See Mormon ix, 32, 33). Hence the importance
of the Newark Tablet as an ancient Nephite relic.

13. Journal of Discourses, Vol. XIII., p. 131, the discourse was
delivered April 10th, 1870, Salt Lake City.

14. Journal of Discourses, Vol. XIII., p. 131.




_The Cincinnati Gold Plate._

Other discoveries of ancient American records, though evidently not
of Hebrew origin, should also be recorded, since they bear important
testimony to the fact that the ancient Americans did engrave records
on metallic plates. One of these records was found in the state of
Ohio, the other in Illinois. The first is the discovery of a gold plate
with raised characters engraven upon it, near Cincinnati, under the
following circumstances:

    Mr. Benjamin E. Styles of Cincinnati, Ohio, while excavating the
    earth for a cistern, in the year 1847, found, a few feet above
    high water mark on the Ohio river, a gold plate. It was thrown
    out with the loose earth while excavating about nine feet beneath
    the surface. Said plate is of fine gold, three or four inches in
    length, averaging about three-fourths of an inch in width, about
    one-eighth of an inch in thickness, with the edges scolloped. In
    the face of which was beautifully set another plate of the same
    material, and fastened together by two pins, running through both.
    This latter plate is full of ancient raised characters, beautifully
    engraved upon its surface; the whole exhibiting fine workmanship.
    The plate was examined by Dr. Wise, a very learned Rabbi of the
    Jewish synagogue in Cincinnati, and editor of a Hebrew paper there,
    who pronounced the characters to be mostly ancient Egyptian.

Such was the description of the circumstances under which the discovery
was made, and of the plate itself, by Elder Parley P. Pratt, to whom
Mr. Styles exhibited the plate, and related the circumstances of
its discovery. Elder Pratt communicated the facts to the "Mormon,"
published in New York, in a letter bearing date of January 1st, 1857.
 [1] A cut of the relic was afterwards made and published by Drake and
Co., of St. Louis, printers, and with it the following certificate was

    We do hereby certify that we did print from a gold plate, the above
    fac-simile, handed to us by Mr. Benjamin Styles, which he said he
    found while digging for a cistern in Cincinnati, Ohio.

    No. 1 is a frame of gold containing a thin plate, No. 2, and
    appears to have been executed by a very superior workman.


    Saint Louis, Missouri. [2]


_The Kinderhook Plates._

The Illinois discovery is summarized as follows from the "Quincy Whig,"
a paper published in Quincy, Illinois:


    A young man by the name of Wiley, a resident in Kinderhook, Pike
    county, went by himself and labored diligently one day in pursuit
    of a supposed treasure, by sinking a hole in the centre of a
    mound. Finding it quite laborious, he invited others to assist
    him. A company of ten or twelve repaired to the mound and assisted
    in digging out the shaft commenced by Wiley. After penetrating
    the mound about eleven feet, they came to a bed of limestone
    that had been subjected to the action of fire. They removed the
    stones, which were small and easy to handle, to the depth of two
    feet more, when they found six brass plates, secured and fastened
    together by two iron wires, but which were so decayed that they
    readily crumbled to dust upon being handled. The plates were so
    completely covered with rust as almost to obliterate the characters
    inscribed upon them, but, after undergoing a chemical process,
    the inscriptions were brought out plain and distinct. There were
    six plates, four inches in length, one inch and three-quarters
    wide at the top and two inches and three-quarters wide at the
    bottom, flaring out to points. There are four lines of characters
    or hieroglyphics on each. On one side of the plates are parallel
    lines running lengthways. By whom these plates were deposited there
    must ever remain a secret, unless some one skilled in deciphering
    hieroglyphics may be found to unravel the mystery. Some pretend to
    say that Smith, the Mormon leader, has the ability to read them.
    If he has, he will confer a great favor on the public by removing
    the mystery which hangs over them. A person present when the plates
    were found remarked that it would go to prove the authenticity of
    the Book of Mormon, which it undoubtedly will. In the place where
    these plates were deposited were also found human bones in the last
    stage of decomposition. There were but a few bones found; and it is
    believed that it was but the burial place of a person or family of
    distinction in ages long gone by, and that these plates contain the
    history of the times, or of a people that existed far, far beyond
    the memory of the present race. But we will not conjecture anything
    about discovery, as it is one which the plates alone can reveal.
    The plates above alluded to were exhibited in this city last week,
    and are now, we understand, in Nauvoo, subject to the inspection of
    the Mormon Prophet. The public curiosity is greatly excited; and if
    Smith can decipher the hieroglyphics on the plates, he will do more
    towards throwing light on the early history of this continent than
    any man now living. [3]

In a communication to the "Times and Seasons" (Nauvoo, Illinois), the
following testimony concerning the discovery was given:

    On the 16th of April last, a respectable merchant, by the name of
    Robert Wiley, commenced digging in a large mound near this place:
    He excavated to the depth of ten feet and came to rock. About that
    time the rain began to fall, and he abandoned the work. On the
    23rd, he and quite a number of the citizens, with myself, repaired
    to the mound; and after making ample opening, we found plenty of
    rock the most of which appeared as though it had been strongly
    burned; and after removing full two feet of said rock, we found
    plenty of charcoal and ashes; also human bones that appeared as
    though they had been burned; and near the encophalon a bundle was
    found that consisted of six plates of brass of a bell shape, each
    having a hole near the small end, and a ring through them all, and
    clasped with two clasps. The rings and clasps appeared to be iron
    very much oxydated. The plates appeared first to be copper, and
    had the appearance of being covered with characters. It was agreed
    by the company that I should cleanse the plates. Accordingly I
    took them to my house washed them with soap and water and a woolen
    cloth, but, finding them not yet cleansed, I treated them with
    dilute sulphuric acid, which made them perfectly clean, on which it
    appeared that they were completely covered with hieroglyphics that
    none as yet have been able to read. Wishing that the world might
    know the hidden things as fast as they come to light, I was induced
    to state the facts, hoping that you would give it an insertion in
    your excellent paper; we feel anxious to know the true meaning
    of the plates, and publishing the facts might lead to the true

    They were found, I judged, more than twelve feet below the surface
    of the top of the mound. I am, most respectfully, a citizen of

    W. P. HARRIS, M. D.

    We the citizens of Kinderhook, whose names are annexed, do certify
    and declare that on the 23rd of April, 1843, while excavating a
    large mound in this vicinity, Mr. R. Wiley took from said mound six
    brass plates of a bell shape, covered with ancient characters. Said
    plates were very much oxydated. The bands and rings on said plates
    mouldered into dust on a slight pressure.





    W. FUGATE. [4]

Since these plates were sent to Nauvoo for the inspection of the
Prophet Joseph, it will be of interest to know what view he took of
them. The following occurs in his journal under date of Monday, May
1st, 1843:

    I insert fac-simile of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook,
    in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. R. Wiley and others,
    while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six
    feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet
    high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton, and were
    covered on both sides with ancient characters. I have translated a
    portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person
    with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the
    loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom
    from the ruler of heaven and earth. [5]

It is proper here to call attention to the fact that the genuineness
of this discovery of the Kinderhook plates is questioned by some
anti-Mormon writers, among them Professor William A. Linn, in his late
work, "The Story of Mormonism," where he says:

    But the true story of the Kinderhook plates was disclosed by
    an affidavit made by W. Fugate of Mound station, Brown county,
    Illinois, before Jay Brown justice of the peace, on June 30,
    1879. In this he stated that the plates were a humbug, gotten up
    by Robert Wiley, Bridge Whitton, and myself. Whitton (who was a
    blacksmith) cut the plates out of some pieces of copper; Wiley
    and I made the hieroglyphics by making impressions on beeswax
    and filling them with acid, and putting it on the plates. When
    they were finished, we put them together with rust made of nitric
    acid, old iron and lead, and bound them with a piece of hoop iron,
    covering them completely with rust. He describes the burial of the
    plates and the digging up, among the spectators of the latter being
    two Mormon Elders, Marsh and Sharp. Sharp declared that the Lord
    had directed them to witness the digging. The plates were borrowed
    and shown to Smith, and were finally given to one Professor
    McDowell of St. Louis, for his museum. [6]

Of this presentation of the matter it is only necessary to say that it
is a little singular that Mr. Fugate alone out of the three said to be
in collusion in perpetrating the fraud should disclose it, and that he
should wait from 1843 to 1879--a period of thirty-six years--before
doing so, when he and those said to be associated with him had such an
excellent opportunity to expose the vain pretensions of the Prophet--
if Fugate's tale be true? For while the statement in the text of the
Prophet's Journal to the effect that the find was genuine, and that he
had translated some of the characters and learned certain historical
facts concerning the person with whose remains the plates were found,
may not have been known at the time to the alleged conspirators to
deceive him, still the editor of the _Times and Seasons_--John Taylor,
the close personal friend of the Prophet--took the find seriously, and
expressed at once explicit confidence in an editorial in the _Times and
Seasons_, of May 1st, 1843, that the Prophet could give a translation
of the plates. And this attitude the Church, continued to maintain; for
in _The Prophet_, (a Mormon weekly periodical, published in New York)
of the 15th of February, 1845, there was published a _fac-simile_ of
the Kinderhook plates, together with the _Times and Seasons_ editorial
and all the above matter of the text. How easy to have covered Joseph
Smith and his followers with ridicule by proclaiming the hoax as soon
as they accepted the Kinderhook plates as genuine! Why was it not done?
The fact that Fugate's story was not told until thirty-six years after
the event, and that he alone of all those who were connected with the
event gives that version of it, is rather strong evidence that his
story is the hoax, not the discovery of the plates, nor the engravings
upon them.


_The Tuccabatchey Plates._

In further evidence that the native Americans engraved records on
metallic plates I quote the following from Adair's "History of the
North American Indians." The passage is a footnote on the custom of the
Indians burying a dead person's treasures with him:

    In the Tuccabatches on the Tallapoose river, thirty miles above the
    Allabahamah garrison are two brazen tables, and five of copper.
    They (the Indians) esteem them so sacred as to keep them constantly
    in their holy of holies, without touching them in the least, only
    in the time of their compounded first-fruit offering, and annual
    expiation of sins; at which season, their magus carries one under
    his arm, ahead of the people, dancing round in sacred armor; next
    to him their head warrior carries another; and those warriors who
    choose it carry the rest after the manner of the high priest;
    all the other carry white canes with swan-feathers at the top.
    Hearing accidentally of these important monuments of antiquity,
    and inquiring pretty much about them, I was certified of the
    truth of the report by four of the southern traders, at the most
    eminent Indian trading house of all English America. One of the
    gentlemen informed me, that at my request he endeavored to get the
    liberty of viewing the aforesaid tables, but it could not possibly
    be obtained, only in the time of the yearly grand sacrifice, for
    fear of polluting their holy things, at which time gentlemen of
    curiosity may see them. Old Bracket, an Indian, of perhaps one
    hundred years old, lives in that old beloved town, who gave the
    following description of them:

    The shape of the five copper plates: One is a foot and a half long
    and seven inches wide, the other four are shorter and narrower.

    The shape of the two brass plates was circular, about a foot and a
    half in diameter.

    He [Bracket] said that he was told by his forefathers that those
    plates were given to them by the man we call God; that there had
    been many more of other shapes, some as long as he could stretch
    with both his arms, and some had writing upon them which are buried
    with particular men; and that they had instructions given with
    them, viz., they must only be handled by particular people, and
    those feasting [fasting?]; and no unclean woman must be suffered to
    come near them or the place, where they are deposited. He said none
    but his own town's people had any such plates given them, and that
    they were a different people from the Creeks. He only remembered
    three more which were buried with three of his family and he was
    the only man of the family now left. He said, there were two copper
    plates under the king's cabin which laid there from the first
    settling of the town.

    This account was taken in the Tuccabatchey square, 27th July, 1759,
    per Will. Bolsover. [7]

The foregoing account of engraven records on gold and copper plates
is important as evidence to the truth of the Book of Mormon only this
far; the Book of Mormon repeatedly declares that such was the manner
of keeping records among the Nephites and the Jaredites, Mormon's
abridgment of the larger Nephite records being engraven in this manner
on plates of gold. And the discoveries related above, all of which were
unknown to Joseph Smith, prove that in ancient America records were so
kept, and constitutes at least important incidental evidence to the
truth of that part of the Book of Mormon statement.


1. Mill. Star, Vol. XIX., p. 103.

2. A fac-simile of the plate is to be found in Mill. Star, Vol. XIX.,
p. 632.

3. Mill. Star, Vol. XXI., p. 44.

4. Mill. Star, Vol. XXI., p. 44.

5. Mill. Star, Vol. XXI., p. 40.

6. "The Story of the Mormons," Linn, p. 87.

7. Lord Kingsborough's Mexican Antiquities, Vol. VIII., pp. 356, 358.




_Central and Western New York an Ancient Battle Field._

According to the Book of Mormon the Hill Cumorah of the Nephites--the
Ramah of the Jaredites--must be regarded as a natural monument
overlooking ancient and extensive battle fields. Around it early in
the sixth century B. C., the Jaredites were destroyed. Here, also, a
thousand years later, at the close of the fourth century A. D., the
Nephites met with practical annihilation in a battle which, whether
judged by the importance of the changes it wrought in the affairs of
one of the world's continents, or the number slain, [1] ranks as one of
the world's great battles. In view of these Book of Mormon facts one
would naturally expect to find some evidences in this section of the
country for such wonderful historical events. Here one has a right to
expect the evidences of military fortifications; for, though a thousand
years had elapsed between the destruction of the Nephites and the
discovery of America by the Europeans, still some military monuments
would doubtless survive that length of time. Fortunately we are not
without kind of evidences that may be reasonably expected. We find such
historical monuments described in the "American Antiquities" of Josiah
Priest, published in Albany, New York. Before quoting, however, I call
attention to the fact that Mr. Priest regarded the fortifications
and other evidences of great battles fought south of lake Ontario as
marking the struggle between the descendants of Tartar races (our
American Indians, in his view) and Scandinavians, whom he assumes had
penetrated into middle New York during the first half of the tenth
century A. D. Of course, I am of the opinion that both the Tartar
theory of the origin of some of our American Indians, and Mr. Priest's
assumption that Scandinavians had pushed their way into the interior
of New York, are both improbable; but his theories do not vitiate the
facts of which he is the compiler and witness; but these facts, I am
sure, better fit the statements of the Book of Mormon than they do his
speculations. The reader will therefore bear in mind that it is the
facts of Mr. Priest that are of value to us, not his theories; and here
are the facts: [2]

    There are the remains of one of those efforts of Scandinavian
    defense, situated on a hill of singular form, on the great
    sandplain between the Susquehannah and Chemung rivers, near their
    junction. The hill is entirely isolated, about three-fourths of
    a mile in circumference, and more than one hundred feet high. It
    has been supposed to be artificial, and to belong to the ancient
    nations to which all works of this sort generally belong. In the
    surrounding plain are many deep holes, of twenty or thirty rods
    in circumference, and twenty feet deep--favoring a belief that
    from these the earth was scooped out, to form the hill with. It
    is four acres large on its top, and perfectly level, beautifully
    situated to overlook the country to a great distance, up and down
    both rivers; there is on its top the remains of a wall, formed of
    earth, stone and wood, which runs round the whole, exactly on the
    brow. The wood is decayed and turned to mould, yet it is traceable,
    and easily distinguished from the natural earth: within is a deep
    ditch or entrenchment, running around the whole summit. [3] From
    this it is evident that a war was once waged here; and were we to
    conjecture between whom, we should say between the Indians and
    Scandinavians, and that this fortification, so advantageously
    chosen, is of the same class of defensive works with those about
    Onondaga, [4] Auburn, [5] and the lakes Ontario, Cayuga, Seneca,
    Oneida [6] and Erie. * * * * * * * In Pompey, [Onondaga county]
    [7] on lot No. 14, is the site of an ancient burying ground,
    upon which, when the country was first settled, was found timber
    growing, apparently of the second growth, judging from the old
    timber reduced to mould, lying round, which was one hundred years
    old, ascertained by counting the concentric grains. In one of these
    graves was found a glass bottle about the size of a common junk
    bottle, having a stopple in its nozzle, and in the bottle was a
    liquid of some sort, but was tasteless. But is it possible that the
    Scandinavians could have had glass in their possession at so early
    a period as the year 950 and thereabout, so as to have brought it
    with them from Europe when their first settlements were made in
    this country? We see no good reason why not, as glass had been
    known three hundred years in Europe before the northern Europeans
    are reputed to have found this country, the art of making glass
    having been discovered in A. D. 664. But in other parts of the
    world, glass had been known from time immemorial, even from the
    flood, as it has been found in the Tower of Babel [8] * * * * *
    * In the same grave with the bottle was found an iron hatchet,
    edged with steel. The eye, or place for the helve, was round, and
    extended or projected out, like the ancient Swiss or German axe.
    On lot No. 9, in the same town, [Pompey] was another aboriginal
    burying ground, covered with forest trees, as the other. In the
    same town, on lot No. 17, were found the remains of a blacksmith's
    forge; at this spot have been ploughed up crucibles, such as
    mineralogists use in refining metals. These axes are similar, and
    correspond in character with those found in the nitrous caves on
    the Gasconade river, which empties into the Missouri, as mentioned
    by Professor Beck's Gazetteer of that country. In the same town
   [Pompey] are the remains of two ancient forts or fortifications,
    with redoubts of a very extensive and formidable character.
    Within the range of these works have been found pieces of cast
    iron, broken from some vessel of considerable thickness. These
    articles cannot well be ascribed to the era of the French war, as
    time enough since, then, till the region round about Onondaga was
    commenced to be cultivated, had not elapsed to give the growth of
    timber found on the spot, of the age above noticed; and, added to
    this, it is said that the Indians occupying that tract of country
    had no tradition of their authors. [9] * * * * * * The hatchets or
    iron axes found here were likely of the same origin with the pieces
    of cast iron. In ploughing the earth, digging wells, canals, or
    excavating for salt waters, about the lakes, new discoveries are
    frequently made, which as clearly show the operations of ancient
    civilization here, as the works of the present race would do, were
    they left to the operations of time for five or six hundred years;
    especially were this country totally to be overrun by the whole
    consolidated savage tribes of the west, exterminating both the
    worker and his works, as appears to have been done in ages past. In
    Scipio, [10] on Salmon creek, a Mr. Halsted has, from time to time
    during ten years past, ploughed up, on a certain extent of land on
    his farm, seven or eight hundred pounds of brass, which appeared to
    have once been formed into various implements, both of husbandry
    and war; helmets and working utensils mingled together. The finder
    of this brass, we are informed as he discovered it carried it to
    Auburn, and sold it by the pound, where it was worked up, with as
    little curiosity attending as though it had been but an ordinary
    article of the country's produce: when, if it had been announced
    in some public manner, the finder would have doubtless been highly
    rewarded by some scientific individual or society, and preserved it
    in the cabinets of the antiquarian, as a relic of by-gone ages of
    the highest interest. On this field, where it was found, the forest
    timber was growing as abundantly, and had attained to as great age
    and size, as elsewhere in the heavy timbered country of the lakes.
    [11] * * * * * * In Pompey, [12] Onondago county, are the remains,
    or outlines, of a town, including more than 500 acres. It appeared
    protected by three circular or eliptical forts, eight miles distant
    from each other; placed in such relative positions as to form a
    triangle round about the town, at those distances. It is thought,
    from appearances, that this stronghold was stormed and taken on the
    line of the north side. In Camillus, [13] in the same county, are
    the remains of two forts, one covering about three acres, on a very
    high hill; it had gateways, one opening to the east, and the other
    to the west, toward a spring, some rods from the works. Its shape
    is eliptical; it has a wall, in some places ten feet high, with a
    deep ditch. Not far from this is another, exactly like it, only
    half as large. There are many of these ancient works hereabouts;
    one in Scipio, two near Auburn, three near Canandaigua, [14] and
    several between the Seneca and Cayuga lakes. [15] A number of such
    fortifications and burial places have been discovered in Ridgeway,
    [16] on the southern shore of lake Ontraio. There is evidence
    enough that long bloody wars were waged among the inhabitants. *
    * * * * * From the known ferocity of the ancient Scandinavians,
    who with other Europeans of ancient times we suppose to be the
    authors of the vast works about the region of Onondaga, dreadful
    wars with infinite butcheries, must have crimsoned every hill and
    dale of this now happy country. [17] * * * * * * In the fourteenth
    township; fourth range of the Holland Company's lands in the state
    of New York, near the Ridge road leading from Buffalo to Niagara
    Falls [18] is an ancient fort, situated in a large swamp; it covers
    about five acres of ground; large trees are standing upon it. The
    earth which forms this fort was evidently brought from a distance,
    as the soil of the marsh is quite another kind, wet and miry, while
    the site of the fort is dry gravel and loam. The site of this
    fortification is singular, unless we suppose it to have been a last
    resort or hiding place from an enemy. The distance to the margin
    of the marsh is about half a mile, where large quantities of human
    bones have been found, on opening the earth, of an extraordinary
    size: the thigh bones, about two inches longer than a common
    sized man's; the jaw or chin bone will cover a large man's face;
    the skull bones are of an enormous thickness; the breast and hip
    bones are also very large. On being exposed to the air they soon
    moulder away, which denotes the great length of time since their
    interment. The disorderly manner in which these bones were found
    to lie, being crosswise, commixed and mingled with every trait of
    confusion, show them to have been deposited by a conquering enemy,
    and not by friends, who would have laid them, as the custom of
    all nations always has been, in a more deferential mode. There
    was no appearance of a bullet having been the instrument of their
    destruction, the evidence of which would have been broken limbs.
    Smaller works of the same kind abound in the country about lake
    Ontraio. [19] But the one of which we have just spoken is the most
    remarkable. * * * * * * North of the mountain, or great slope
    towards the lake, [Ontraio], there are no remains of ancient works
    or tumuli, which strongly argues, that the mountain or ridgeway
    once was the southern boundary or shore of lake Ontario; the waters
    having receded from three to seven miles from its ancient shore,
    nearly the whole length of the lake, occasioned by some strange
    convulsion in nature, [20] redeeming much of the lands of the west
    from the water that had covered it from the time of the deluge."

These described fortifications and burial mounds make it clear that
Central and Western New York at some time have been the scenes of
destructive battles; and the fact constitutes strong presumptive
evidence of the statements of the Book of Mormon that great battles
were fought there. The only thing which leads modern writers to ascribe
a comparatively recent date to the wars whereof central and western
New York was the battlefields is the discovery of glass, iron and
brass within these fortifications. It is assumed that these metals and
glass were unknown to the ancient Americans, hence Mr. Priest sets
forth the theory that the battles were fought between wild tribes of
Indians and Scandinavians. Instead of taking this view of the case,
however, I shall rely in part upon the finding of these implements made
of iron and brass as sustaining the statement of the Book of Mormon
that the Nephites were acquainted with and used these metals; but of
this I shall have more to say later, when considering the objections
urged against the Book of Mormon. Meantime I merely call attention to
the fact which here concerns me, namely, that central and western New
York constitute the great battle fields described in the Book of Mormon
as being the place where two nations met practical annihilation, the
Jaredites and Nephites; and of which the military fortifications and
monuments described by Mr. Priest are the silent witnesses.


_Miscellaneous Book of Mormon Historical Incidents and Nephite_
Customs Found in the Native American Traditions.

Besides what has already been set forth on the confirmation of Nephite
historical incidents in native American traditions and mythologies,
there remains several other Lamanite and Nephite historical incidents
and customs, mentioned in the Book of Mormon, that are preserved in
the traditions of the native Americans, and which ought to receive
consideration here.

_Blood Drinking._

One of the customs of the Lamanites, in the matter of eating raw flesh
and drinking the blood of animals, is mentioned in the book of Enos,
where a description is given of the barbarity of the Lamanites as

    And I bear record that the people of Nephi did seek diligently to
    restore the Lamanites unto the true faith in God. But our labors
    were vain; their hatred was fixed, and they were led by their evil
    nature that they became wild, and ferocious, and a bloodthirsty
    people; full of idolatry and filthiness: feeding upon beasts of
    prey; dwelling in tents, and wandering about in the wilderness with
    a short skin girdle about their loins and their heads shaven, and
    their skill was in the bow, and in the cimeter, and the axe. And
    many of them did eat nothing save it were raw meat. [22]

Jarom mentions substantially the same thing:

    And they were scattered upon much of the face of the land; and the
    Lamanites also. And they were exceeding more numerous than were
    they of the Nephites; and they loved murder and would drink the
    blood of beasts. [23]

Such the statement of the Book of Mormon. And now the native American
tradition bearing on this from Bancroft. Speaking of the Toltecs as an
enlightened race of native Americans, who are credited with the first
introduction of agriculture in America, our author says:

    But even during this Toltec period hunting tribes, both of
    Nahua and other blood, were pursuing their game in the forests
    and mountains, especially in the northern region. Despised by
    their more civilized, corn-eating brethren, they were known as
    barbarians, dogs, Chichimecs, "suckers of blood," from the custom
    attributed to them of drinking blood and eating raw flesh. [24]


__Human Sacrifices. Cannibalism.__

Another statement in the Book of Mormon with reference to a Lamanite
custom concerning their treatment of prisoners taken in war is as
follows. Speaking of an invasion of the Lamanites into Nephite
territory the Book of Mormon says:

    And they did also march forward against the city of Teancum,
    and did drive the inhabitants forth out of her, and did take
    many prisoners both women and children, and did offer them up
    as sacrifices unto their idol gods. And it came to pass that
    in the three hundred and sixty and seventh years, [A. D.], the
    Nephites being angry because the Lamanites had scattered their
    women and their children, that they did go against the Lamanites
    with exceeding great anger, insomuch that they did beat again the
    Lamanites, and drive them out of their lands. [25]

Later, referring to a second invasion of the Nephite lands, Mormon also

    And when they had come the second time, the Nephites were driven
    and slaughtered with an exceeding great slaughter; their women and
    their children were again sacrificed unto idols. [26]

Some years later, Mormon, in an epistle to his son Moroni, speaking of
the awful depravity which characterized both Nephites and Lamanites,
says of them: "They thirst after blood and revenge continually." [27]
Of the treatment of certain prisoners taken from one of the cities he
also says:

    And the husbands and fathers of those women and children they have
    slain; and they feed the women upon the flesh of their husbands,
    and the children upon the flesh of their fathers; and no water,
    save a little, do they give unto them. [28]

He describes how the Nephites defiled the daughters of Lamanite
prisoners, and then continues:

    And after they had done this thing, they did murder them in a most
    cruel manner, torturing their bodies, even unto death; and after
    they have done this, they devour their flesh like unto wild beasts,
    because of the hardness of their hearts; and they do it for a token
    of bravery. [29]

This, doubtless, was the beginning--in the later part of the fourth
century A. D., "not early in the fourteenth century," as held by
Prescott [30]--of those horrible human sacrifices and acts of
cannibalism found among the Aztecs at the time of the Spanish invasion
of Mexico, and which so shocked even the cruel Spaniards. Bancroft, in
telling of the treatment of prisoners taken in war among the Aztecs,
describes an unequal battle for life that was sometimes accorded the
male prisoners, and then adds:

    Those who were too faint-hearted to attempt this hopless combat,
    had their hearts torn out at once, whilst the others were
    sacrificed only after having been subdued by the braves. The
    bleeding and quivering heart was held up to the sun and then thrown
    into a bowl, prepared for its reception. An assistant priest sucked
    the blood from the gash in the chest through a hollow cane, the
    end of which he elevated towards the sun, and then discharged
    its contents into a plume-bordered cup held by the captor of the
    prisoner just slain. This cup was carried round to all the idols in
    the temples and chapels, before whom another blood-filled tube was
    held up as if to give them a taste of the contents; this ceremony
    performed, the cup was left at the Palace. The corpse was taken
    to the chapel where the captive had watched and there flayed, the
    flesh being consumed at a banquet as before. The skin was given to
    certain priests, or college youths, who went from house to house
    dressed in the ghastly garb, with the arms swinging, singing,
    dancing, and asking for contributions; those who refused to give
    anything received a stroke in the face from the dangling arm. [31]

Prescott, referring to the chief object of war among the Aztecs, and
the treatment of prisoners taken, says:

    The tutelary deity of the Aztecs was the god of war. A great object
    of their military expeditions was, to gather hecatombs of captives
    for his altars. * * * * * * At the head of all, [i. e., all the
    Aztec deities] stood the terrible Huitzilopotchli. * * * * * * *
    This was the patron deity of the nation. His fantastic image was
    loaded with costly ornaments. His temples were the most stately
    and august of the public edifices; and his altars reeked with the
    blood of human hecatombs in every city of the empire. * * * * * The
    most loathsome part of the story--the manner in which the body of
    the sacrificed captive was disposed of--remains yet to be told. It
    was delivered to the warrior who had taken him in battle, and by
    him, after being dressed, was served up in an entertainment to his
    friends. This was not the coarse repast of famished cannibals, but
    a banquet teeming with delicious beverages and delicate viands,
    prepared with art, and attended by both sexes, who, as we shall see
    hereafter, conducted themselves with all the decorum of civilized
    life. Surely, never were refinement and the extreme of barbarism
    brought so closely in contact with each other. [32]

Such are the depths of depravity to which a people may sink when
once the Spirit of God is withdrawn from them. It is not to excite
reflections upon this condition of refined barbarism, however, that
these quotations are made. I am interested here only in pointing out
the fact that these revolting customs found among the native Americans
confirms the statement made in the Book of Mormon, that such horrible
customs had their origin among their Nephite and Lamanite ancestors.


_Burying the Hatchet._

Doubtless the native American custom of "burying the hatchet" (that
is, in concluding a war, it is the native custom, as a testimony
that hostilities have ceased, and as a sign of peace, to bury the
war-hatchet or other weapons of war), had its origin in the following
Book of Mormon incident: Early in the first century B. C., a number of
Nephites, sons of King Mosiah II., succeeded in converting a number of
Lamanites to the Christian religion; and such became their abhorrence
of war, which aforetime had been one of their chief delights, that they
entered into a covenant of peace and determined no more to shed the
blood of their fellow men. In token of this covenant they buried their
weapons of war, their leader saying:

    And now, my brethren, if our brethren seek to destroy us, behold,
    we will hide away our swords, yea, even we will bury them deep in
    the earth, that they may be kept bright. * * * * And now it came
    to pass that when the king had made an end of these sayings, and
    all the people were assembled together, they took their swords, and
    all the weapons which were used for the shedding of man's blood,
    and they did bury them up deep in the earth; and this they did, it
    being in their view a testimony to God, and also to men, that they
    never would use weapons again for shedding a man's blood. [33]

This circumstance of burying weapons of war in token of peace is
several times afterwards alluded to in the Book of Mormon.


_Hagoth's Marine Migrations Preserved in Native Legend._

Another historical event very apt to live in the native traditions is
the first Nephite migration in ships after their landing in the western
hemisphere. This event took place in the latter half of the century
immediately preceding the birth of Christ. One Hagoth, described in the
Book of Mormon as "an exceedingly curious man,"

    Went forth and built a large ship on the borders of the land
    Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth in the
    west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.
    And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein
    and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and
    children; and they took their course northward. [34]

Subsequently other ships were built and the first returned, and
migration by this method of travel was kept up for some time. Finally
two of the vessels conducting this migration by the way of the west
sea, were lost; and the Nephites supposed them to have been wrecked
in the depths of the sea. [35] So marked a circumstance as this, I
repeat, occurring as it did among a people that can not be considered
as a sea-faring people, would be apt to live in the traditions of their
descendants. Such a tradition, I believe, exists. Bancroft, speaking
of a war of conquest waged by the Miztec and Zapotec kings against
a people inhabiting the southern shores of Tehuantepec, called the
Huaves, says:

    The Huaves are said to have come from the south, from Nicaragua,
    or Peru, say some authors. The causes that led to their migrations
    are unknown; but the story goes that after coasting northward, and
    attempting to disembark at several places, they finally effected
    a landing at Tehuantepec. Here they found the Mijes, the original
    possessors of the country; but these they drove out, or, as some
    say, mingled with them, and soon made themselves masters of the
    soil. * * * * * * * But the easy life they led in this beautiful
    and fertile region soon destroyed their ancient energy, and they
    subsequently fell an unresisting prey to the Zapotec kings. [36]

A tradition which locates the landing of a similar maritime expedition
still further north is related by Nadaillac. Speaking of the
"Kitchen-Middens" or shell-heaps found here and there on the Pacific
coast, and which our author takes as indicating the location of the
former homes of numerous tribes, says:

    When the Indians were questioned about them [the shell-heaps]
    they generally answered that they are very old, and are the work
    of people unknown to them or to their fathers. As an exception to
    this rule, however, the Californians attributed a large shell heap
    formed of mussel shells and the bones of animals, on Point St.
    George, near San Francisco, to the Hohgates, the name they give to
    seven mythical strangers who arrived in the country from the sea,
    and who were the first to build and live in houses. The Hohgates
    killed deer, sea-lions, and seals; they collected the mussels
    which were very abundant on the neighboring rocks, and the refuse
    of their meals became piled up about their homes. One day when
    fishing, they saw a gigantic seal; they managed to drive a harpoon
    into it, but the wounded animal fled seaward, dragging the boat
    rapidly with it toward the fathomless abysses of the Charekwin.
    At the moment when the Hohgates were about to be engulfed in the
    depths, where those go who are to endure eternal cold, the rope
    broke the seal disappeared, and the boat was flung up into the air.
    Since then the Hohgates, changed into brilliant stars, return no
    more to earth, where the shell heaps remain as witness of their
    former residence. [37]

The word "Hohgates," I believe is but a variation of the word "Hagoth,"
the name of the man who started these maritime expeditions, and it
would be altogether in keeping with Nephite customs [38] for those who
sailed away in his vessels to be called "Hagothites" or "Hohgates."
The vessel of this tradition may be one of those lost to the Nephites,
which finally found its way to the Californian coast where its
occupants landed with their ideas of Nephite civilization, and lived
as described in the tradition. One is tempted to smile at the childish
ending of the tradition; but under it may not one see that it is but
the legendary account of the fact that the vessel sailed away from the
California shores and was lost, or, at least, was heard of no more by
the natives of those shores.


_Native American Race Unity._

The subject of American antiquities should not be closed without a
brief reference, at least, to the unity of the American race. Barring
such migrations of other races to America as may have taken place since
the fall of the Nephites at Cumorah, at the close of the fourth century
A. D., and such as to a limited extent may have been going on in the
extreme north via Behring Strait at an earlier date, the Book of Mormon
requires substantial unity of race in the later native American people.
That is to say, they ought to be of Israelitish descent, a mixture of
the tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah--but chiefly, if not all, of
Hebrew descent; and even the Jaredites were but a more ancient branch
of the same stock. [39]

On this subject, as upon all others pertaining to American antiquities
and peoples, writers are divided; yet it is not difficult to marshal in
support of race unity for native Americans the very highest authority;
and what is of most importance is the facts are beyond question behind
their theory.

Citing the facts on which certain authors rely to establish the unity
of the American race, Bancroft says:

    It was obvious to the Europeans when they first beheld the natives
    of America, that these were unlike the intellectual white-skinned
    race of Europe, the barbarous blacks of Africa, or any nation or
    people which they had hitherto encountered, yet were strikingly
    like each other. Into whatsoever part of the newly discovered
    lands they penetrated, they found a people seemingly one in color,
    physiognomy, customs, and in mental and social traits. Their
    vestiges of antiquity and their languages presented a coincidence
    which was generally observed by early travelers. Hence physical
    and psychological comparisons are advanced to prove ethnological
    resemblances among all the peoples of America. * * * * * * Morton
    and his confreres, the originators of the American homogeneity
    theory, even go so far as to claim for the American man an origin
    as indigenous as that of the fauna and flora. They classify all the
    tribes of America, excepting only the Esquimaux who wandered over
    from Asia, as the American race, and divided it into the American
    family and the Toltecan family. Blumenbach classifies the Americans
    as a distinct species. The American Mongolidae of Dr. Latham are
    divided into Esquimaux and American Indians. Dr. Morton perceives
    the same characteristic lineaments on the face of the Fuegian and
    the Mexican, and in tribes inhabiting the Rocky mountains, the
    Mississippi valley, and Florida. The same osteological structure,
    swarthy color, straight hair, meagre beard, obliquely cornered
    eyes, prominent cheek bones, and thick lips, are common to them
    all. * * * * * * Humboldt characterizes the nations of America
    as one race, by their straight glossy hair, thin beard, swarthy
    complexion and cranial formation. [40]

Dr. Daniel G. Brinton, professor of American archaeology and
linguistics in the University of Pennsylvania--than whom no higher
authority upon the subject can be quoted--says:

    On the whole, the race is singularly uniform in its physical
    traits, and individuals taken from any part of the continent could
    easily be mistaken for inhabitants of numerous other parts. * * * *
    * * The culture of the native Americans strongly attests the ethnic
    unity of the race. This applies equally to the ruins and relics of
    its vanished nations, as to the institutions of existing tribes.
    Nowhere do we find any trace of foreign influence or instruction,
    nowhere any arts or social systems to explain which we must evoke
    the aid of teachers from the eastern hemisphere. * * * * American
    culture, wherever examined, presents a family likeness which the
    more careful observers of late years have taken pains to put in a
    strong light. This was accomplished for governmental institutions
    and domestic architecture by Lewis H. Morgan, for property rights
    and the laws of war by A. F. Bandelier, for the social condition
    of Mexico and Peru by Dr. Gustav Bruhl, and I may add for the
    myths and other expressions of the religious sentiment by myself.
    * * * The psychic identity of the Americans is well illustrated
    in their languages. There are indeed indefinite discrepancies in
    their lexicography and in their surface marphology; but in their
    logical sub-structure, in what Willhelm von Humboldt called the
    "inner form," they are strikingly like. The points in which this is
    especially apparent are in the development of pronominal forms, in
    the abundance of generic particles, in the overweening preference
    for concepts of action (verbs) rather than concepts of existence
    (nouns), and in the consequent subordination of the latter to the
    former in the proposition. [41]

Following the same general line of thought Nadaillac says:

    The Indians, who were successively conquered by foreign invaders,
    spoke hundreds of different dialects. Bancroft estimates that there
    were six hundred between Alaska and Panama. Ameghino speaks of
    eight hundred in South America. Most of these, however, are mere
    derivatives from a single mother tongue like the Aymara and the
    Guarani. We quote these figures for what they are worth. Philology
    has no precise definition of what constitutes a language, and
    any one can add to or deduct from the numbers given according
    to the point of view from which he considers the matter. As an
    illustration of this, it may be mentioned that some philologists
    estimate the languages of North America at no less than thirteen
    hundred, whilst Squier would reduce those of both continents to
    four hundred. These dialects present a complete disparity in
    their vocabulary side by side with great similarity of structure.
    "In America," says Humboldt, "from the country of the Esquimaux
    to the banks of the Orinoco, and thence to the frozen shores
    of the Straits of Magellan, languages differing entirely in
    their derivation have, if we may use the expression, the same
    physiognomy. Striking analogies in grammatical construction have
    been recognized, not only in the more perfect languages, such as
    those of the Incas, the Aymara, the Guarani, and the Mexicans, but
    also in languages which are extremely crude. Dialects, the roots
    of which do not resemble each other more than the roots of the
    Slavonian and Biscayan, show resemblances in structure similar to
    those which are found between the Sanscrit, the Persian, the Greek,
    and the Germanic languages." [42]

The fact that the different dialects, or languages, as some call them,
"are mere derivatives from a single mother tongue," argues strongly, of
course, for ultimate race unity.

The following summary of evidences on the substantial unity of race in
American peoples is from Marcus Wilson, and will be found valuable:

    Nor indeed is there any proof that the semi-civilized inhabitants
    of Mexico, Yucatan, and Central America, were a race different
    from the more savage tribes by which they were surrounded; but,
    on the contrary, there is much evidence in favor of their common
    origin, and in proof that the present tribes, or at least many of
    them, are but the dismembered fragments of former nations. The
    present natives of Yucatan and Central America, after a remove of
    only three centuries from their more civilized ancestors, present
    no diversities, in their natural capacities, to distinguish them
    from the race of the common Indian. And if the Mexicans and the
    Peruvians could have arisen from the savage state, it is not
    impossible that the present rude tribes may have remained in it;
    or, if the latter were once more civilized than at present, as
    they have relapsed into barbarism, so others may have done. The
    anatomical structure of the skeletons found within the ancient
    mounds of the United States, does not differ more from that of
    the present Indians than tribes of the latter, admitted to be of
    the same race, differ from each other. In the physical appearance
    of all the American aborigines, embracing the semi-civilized
    Mexicans, the Peruvians, and the wandering savage tribes, there is
    a striking uniformity; nor can any distinction of races here be
    made. In their languages there is a general unity of structure, and
    a great similarity in grammatical forms, which prove their common
    origin; while the great diversity in the words of the different
    languages, shows the great antiquity of the period of peopling
    America. In the generally uniform character of their religious
    opinions and rites, we discover original unity and an identity of
    origin; while the diversities here found, likewise indicate the
    very early period of the separation and dispersion of the tribes.
    Throughout most of the American tribes have been found traces of
    the pictorial delineations, and hieroglyphical symbols, by which
    the Mexicans and the Peruvians communicated ideas, and preserved
    the memory of events. The mythological traditions of the savage
    tribes, and the semi-civilized nations, have general features
    of resemblance--generally implying a migration from some other
    country--containing distinct allusions to a deluge--and attributing
    their knowledge of the arts to some fabulous teacher in remote
    ages. Throughout nearly the whole continent, the dead were buried
    in a sitting posture; the smoking of tobacco was a prevalent
    custom, and the calumet, or pipe of peace, was everywhere deemed
    sacred. And, in fine, the numerous and striking analogies between
    the barbarous and the cultivated tribes, are sufficient to justify
    the belief in their primitive relationship and common origin. * * *
    * * * With regard to the opinion entertained by some, that colonies
    from different European nations, and at different times, have been
    established here, we remark, [43] that, if so, no distinctive
    traces of them have ever been discovered; and there is a uniformity
    in the physical appearance of all the American tribes, which
    forbids the supposition of a mingling of different races. [44]

The well established fact, of race unity, is one more evidence for the
truth of the Book of Mormon to be added to that cumulative mass of
evidence we are here compiling, since unity of race is what the Book of
Mormon requires for the peoples of America.


_Did the Book of Mormon Antedate Works in English on American_
Antiquities, Accessible to Joseph Smith and His Associates.

In the presence of so many resemblances between native American
traditions and Book of Mormon historical incidents and Nephite customs,
I can understand how the question naturally arises in some minds
whether the ancient historical incidents, and the customs of American
peoples--purported to be recorded in the Book of Mormon,--whence the
traditions come, or is it from the native American traditions that the
alleged historical incidents and customs of the Book of Mormon come.
That is to say, was it possible for Joseph Smith or those associated
with him in bringing forth the Book of Mormon to have possessed such
a knowledge of American antiquities and traditions that they could
make their book's alleged historical incidents, and the customs of
its peoples, conform to the antiquities and traditions of the native
Americans? The question may appear foolish to those acquainted with the
character and environment of the Prophet; but to those not acquainted
with him or his environment the question may be of some force, and for
that reason it is considered here.

In the first place, then, it must be remembered how great the task
would be to become sufficiently acquainted with American antiquities
and traditions to make the Book of Mormon story and the alleged customs
of its people agree with the antiquities and traditions of the American
natives, in the striking manner in which we have found them to agree.
In the second place the youthfulness of the Prophet must be taken into
account--he was but twenty-five years of age when the Book of Mormon
was published, and it is the concensus of opinion on the part of all
those competent to speak upon the subject, that he was not a student of
books. But what is most important of all, and what settles the question
on this point (whether Joseph Smith, Solomon Spaulding, or Sidney
Rigdon be regarded as the author) is the fact that the means through
which to obtain the necessary knowledge of American antiquities, the
body of literature in English now at one's command on the subject, was
not then (1823-1830) in existence. The Spanish and native American
writers previous to 1830 may be dismissed from consideration at
once, since their works could not be available to Joseph Smith and
his associates because written in a language unknown to them, and
such fragmentary translations of them as existed were so rare as to
be inaccessible to men of western New York and Ohio. About the only
works to which Joseph Smith could possibly have had access before the
publication of the Book of Mormon would have been:

First, the publications of the "American Antiquarian Society,
Translations and Collections," published in the "Archaeoligia
Americana," Worcester, Massachusetts, 1820; but this information was
so fragmentary in character that it could not possibly have supplied
the historical incidents of the Book of Mormon, or the customs of its
peoples, even could it be proven that Joseph Smith had been familiar
with that collection.

Second, the little work of Ethan Smith, published in Vermont--second
edition 1825--in which the author holds the native American Indian
tribes to be descendants of the ten lost tribes of Israel. In fact his
work bears the title, "View of the Hebrews; or the Tribes of Israel in

Third, "The History of the American Indians," by James Adair, published
in England, 1775. Mr. Adair confines the scope of his work to the North
American Indians.

Fourth. The translation of some parts of Humboldt's works on New Spain,
published first in America and England between the years 1806 and 1809,
and later Black's enlarged translation of them in New York, 1811.

These are the only works, so far as I can ascertain, that could at
all be accessible to Joseph Smith or any of his associates; and there
is no evidence that the Prophet or his associates ever saw any one
of them. Moreover, notwithstanding some of these writers advance the
theory that the native Americans are descendants of the ten lost
tribes of Israel, and their books contain fragmentary and disconnected
information concerning American antiquities--no one acquainted with
these works could possibly regard them as being the source whence Book
of Mormon incidents or customs of Book of Mormon peoples were drawn,
a fact which will be more apparent after we have considered--as we
shall later consider--the originality of the Book of Mormon. Since,
therefore, from the very nature of all the circumstances surrounding
the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, neither Joseph Smith nor his
associates could possibly have become acquainted with the location of
the chief centers of ancient American civilizations, nor with native
American traditions and customs, it must be evident that Book of Mormon
historical incidents and the customs of Book of Mormon peoples were not
derived from works on American antiquities and traditions.


_The Value of the Evidence Supplied by American Antiquities_

The evidence I have to offer from American antiquities is now before
the reader. Not all the evidence that could be massed upon the subject,
but all that my space in this work will permit me to present. I do not
claim that the evidence is either as full or perfect as one could wish
it to be, nor that it is free from what some will regard as serious
difficulties; but this much I feel can be insisted upon:

The evidence establishes the fact of the existence of ancient
civilizations in America; that the said civilizations are successive;
that their monuments, overlay each other, and are confused by a
subsequent period of barbarism; that the monuments of the chief centers
of American civilizations are found where the Book of Mormon requires
them to be located; that the traditions of the native Americans
concerning ancient Bible facts, such as relate to the creation, the
flood, the Tower of Babel, and the dispersion of mankind, etc., sustain
the likelihood of the forefathers of our American aborigines, in
very ancient times, being cognizant of such facts either by personal
contact with them, or by having a knowledge of them through the Hebrew
scriptures, or perhaps through both means. All this is in harmony with
what the Book of Mormon makes known concerning the Jaredite and Nephite
peoples; for the forefathers of the former people were in personal
contact with the building of Babel, the confusion of languages and
the dispersion of mankind; while the Nephites had knowledge of these
and many other ancient historical facts through the Hebrew scriptures
which they brought with them to America. The evidences presented
also disclose the fact that the native American traditions preserve
the leading historical events of the Book of Mormon. That is, the
facts of the Jaredite and Nephite migrations; of the intercontinental
movements of Book of Mormon peoples; of the advent and character of
Messiah, and his ministrations among the people; of the signs of his
birth and of his death; of the fact of the Hebrew origin and unity of
the race. All these facts so strong in the support of the claims of
the Book of Mormon--whatever else of confusion may exist in American
antiquities--I feel sure can not be moved. It should be remembered, in
this connection, that it is not insisted upon in these pages that the
evidences which American antiquities afford are absolute proofs of the
claims of the Book of Mormon. I go no further than to say there is a
tendency of external proof in them; and when this tendency of proof
is united with the positive, direct external testimony which God has
provided in those Witnesses that he himself has ordained to establish
the truth of the Book of Mormon, the Three Witnesses and the Eight,
this tendency of proof becomes very strong, and is worthy of most
serious attention on the part of those who would investigate the claims
of this American volume of scripture.


1. There were slain of the Nephites alone 230,000; see Mosiah vi: 10-15.

2. I quote from the 1838 edition. Mr. Josiah Priest's work, "American
Antiquities," first edition, was published A. D. 1833, three years
after the publication of the Book of Mormon. See Charles Tompson's
"Evidence and Proof of the Book of Mormon," also I. Woodbridge Riley's
"Founder of Mormonism," page 126, where in foot note 32 he says of
Priest's work: "the first edition appeared in 1833, two other editions
followed in that year."

3. The hill here described near the junction of the Susquehannah and
Chemung river is about ninety-five miles in a direct line southeast of

4. Onondaga, about fifty-five miles due east of Cumorah.

5. Auburn, thirty miles east of Cumorah.

6. The lakes Cayuga, Seneca and Oneida, as is well known, lie a little
to the south and east of Cumorah. Ontraio is a short distance to the
north and Erie to the west.

7. Sixty miles east of Cumorah.

8. From this showing, then, there can be no objection to saying that
the glass vessel was of Jaredite origin. In describing how the brother
of Jared melted from the rock sixteen small stones it is said they were
white and clear "even as transparent glass" of which the late Orson
Pratt in a foot note says: "From this it is evident that the art of
making glass was known at that early period." Ether iii: 1, and note

9. The absence of traditions among the natives concerning these
monuments rather inclines one to the belief that they must have been
earlier than any possible Scandinavian occupancy of the country.

10. Scipio in Cayuga country, about forty-five miles east of Cumorah.

11. American Antiquities, pp. 259, 260, 261, 262.

12. Pompey between sixty and seventy miles east of Cumorah.

13. Less than fifty miles east of Cumorah.

14. Canandaigua, some ten or twelve miles south of Cumorah.

15. Both bodies of water but a short distance from Cumorah.

16. Less than seventy miles northwest from Cumorah.

17. The desperate ferocity of Nephite and Lamanite as described in
the Book of Mormon is as good and even better explanation of the
"infinite butcheries" here alluded to. See this volume, pp. 74-76, for
description of this ferocity.

18. Less than one hundred miles due west from Cumorah.

19. The southern shore of lake Ontario runs due east and west about ten
to twelve miles north of Cumorah for a distance of one hundred miles.

20. Was this convulsion in nature which changed the shore along
lake Ontraio connected with those mighty cataclysms which shook the
continent during the crucifixion of Messiah?

21. American Antiquities, Josiah Priest, pp. 324, 327, 328.

22. Enos i: 20.

23. Jarom i: 6.

24. Native Races, Bancroft, Vol. II., p. 344.

25. Mormon iv: 14, 15.

26. Mormon iv: 21.

27. Moroni ix: 5.

28. Moroni ix: 8.

29. Moroni ix: 10.

30. Conquest of Mexico, Vol. I., p. 73.

31. Native Races, Vol. II., pp. 310, 311.

32. Conquest of Mexico, Prescott, Vol. I., pp. 54, 63, 75, 76.

33. Alma xxiv: 16-18.

34. Alma lxiii: 5, 6.

35. Alma lxiii: 8.

36. Native Races, Vol. V., pp. 529, 530.

37. Pre-Historic America, pp. 64, 65.

38. Those who followed Nephi were called Nephites; those who followed
Laman, Lamanites; Zoram, Zoramites, the people of Jared, Jaredites; and
so on throughout the Book of Mormon.

39. See Vol. I., pp. 167, 168 and note.

40. Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. I., pp. 20-21.

41. The American Race, Daniel G. Brinton, pp. 41, 43, 44, 45, 55, 56.

42. Pre-Historic America, pp. 5, 6.

43. The remark of Mr. Wilson against the probability of colonies from
different European nations at different times having established
colonies in America may raise the question for a moment, "Is not
such a contention against the Book of Mormon theory of the origin of
American peoples, since that book distinctly accounts for the peopling
of America by migration of colonies, from the eastern hemisphere?" The
seeming difficulty is overcome at once when it is remembered that the
several colonies of the Book of Mormon migrations are all of one race.
Lehi's colony was made up of two families and the man Zoram, servant
of Laban. Lehi, it is well know, was an Israelite of the tribe of
Manasseh; Ishmael, the head of the other family, was an Israelite of
the tribe of Ephraim. Zoram was an Israelite, but his tribe is unknown.
Mulek's colony were undoubtedly Jews. So that from the repeopling of
America after the destruction of the Jaredites early in the sixth
century B. C.--so far as Book of Mormon migrations are concerned--the
colonies were all of one race. And we have also seen that even the
Jaredites were an earlier branch of the same race.

44. History of the United States (Marcus Wilson) Book I chapter iii.




_The Place of the Patriarch Joseph in Israel.--The Promises to Him_
and His Seed.

It is no part of my purpose to deal at length with any argument that
may be based upon Bible evidences to the truth of the Book of Mormon.
That field is already occupied by others. Indeed from the commencement
it has been one of the chief sources drawn upon by the Elders of the
Church in proof of the claims of the Book of Mormon. [1] I shall treat
that evidence, however, in merely an incidental way, and as deriving
its importance chiefly from the circumstances of its blending in with
the enlarged and general scheme of things pertaining to Israel, and the
work of Messiah brought to light by the Book of Mormon.

In pursuance of this treatment I call attention to the blessing of
Jacob upon the head of his grand sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. It should
be remembered that to Joseph, the son of Jacob, a double portion of
honor was granted in Israel. While no tribe is especially called by
his name, yet two tribes are his through his sons, viz., the tribe of
Ephraim and the tribe of Manasseh. This came about in the following
manner: Reuben, the first born of Jacob, defiled his father's wife,
Bilhah. For which awful crime he lost his place as a prince in the
house of Israel, which place was given indirectly to Joseph. Why I say
indirectly, is because Ephraim, Joseph's younger son, was the one who
received the blessing of the first born, and was placed as the first of
the tribes of Israel. It is for this reason that the Lord was wont to
say, "I am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first born." [2] In
proof of the things here set forth I quote the following:

    Now the sons of Reuben, the first born of Israel, (for he was the
    firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his
    birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph, the son of Israel:
    and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright. For
    Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief
    ruler, but the birthright was Joseph's. [3]

That is, not after the natural birthright, but after the birthright
appointment made by the patriarch Jacob to Ephraim. Ephraim, then, will
take the place of Reuben--the place of the firstborn. But there was
also a tribe of Manasseh in Israel, as well as of Ephraim, and thus
was a double portion given unto Joseph in that from him are two tribes
in Israel. And now as to further blessings conferred upon Joseph and
his sons. When Jacob and his son Joseph were restored to each other
in Egypt, the old patriarch rejoiced to see the two sons of Joseph,
Ephraim and Manasseh--and now the Bible narrative:

    And Joseph brought them out from between his knees, and he bowed
    himself with his face to the earth. And Joseph took them both,
    Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel's left hand, and Manasseh
    in his left hand towards Israel's right hand, and brought them near
    unto him. And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it
    upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon
    Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the

    And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers
    Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long
    unto this day, the angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the
    lads and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers
    Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst
    of the earth. And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right
    hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him; and he held up
    his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's
    head. And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father; for
    this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head. And his
    father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it; he also
    shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his
    younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become
    a multitude of nations. And he blessed them that day, saying, In
    thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as
    Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh. [4]

Again when the patriarch Jacob gave his final blessing to his sons, of
Joseph he said:

    Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose
    branches run over the wall: The archers have sorely grieved him,
    and shot at him, and hated him: but his bow abode in strength, and
    the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mightily
    God of Jacob; (from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel):
    Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the
    Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above,
    blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts,
    and of the womb; the blessings of thy father have prevailed above
    the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bounds of the
    everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the
    crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren. [5]

Moses also seems to have been impressed with the idea that Joseph was
to receive a portion above his brethren; for in blessing the tribes of
Israel, when coming to Joseph, he said:

    Blessed of the Lord be his land, for the precious things of heaven,
    for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath, and for the
    precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the precious
    things put forth by the moon, and for the chief things of the
    ancient mountains, and for the precious things of the lasting
    hills, and for the precious things of the earth and fullness
    thereof, and for the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let
    the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of the
    head of him that was separated from his brethren. His glory is like
    the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of
    unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends
    of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they
    are the thousands of Manasseh. [6]

A comparison of the blessings of the other tribes with the blessings of
Joseph's will convince him who makes it how much greater are to be the
blessings of Joseph than those of his brethren, especially in respect
of the extent and the fruitfulness of the lands that his descendants
shall occupy. Furthermore, in view of all that is said in these
prophetic utterances, there can be no question but what the descendants
of Joseph, the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, are to be very prominent
in the affairs of Israel and take an important part in God's great
drama in which he will work out the restoration of his people, Israel,
and the redemption of the world.

Summarizing these prophetic blessings we may say, that to the tribe of
Ephraim is given the place and honor of the first born in Israel; that
to him pertains the "pushing of the people together"--Ephraim's part
in the gathering of Israel in the last days; that the seed of Manasseh
is to become a great people, while Ephraim is to become a multitude
of nations--greater than Manasseh, as is becoming to the tribe of the
first born--"they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the
thousands of Manasseh;" that the land possessed by Joseph's posterity
is to be peculiarly great and fruitful, blessed with the precious
things of heaven, with the precious fruits brought forth by the sun,
for the chief things of the ancient mountains, for the precious things
of the lasting hills, and for the precious things of the earth and the
fullness thereof; that Joseph is as a fruitful bough whose branches run
over the wall (i. e., his possessions extend in some way beyond the
recognized boundaries of Israel's Palestine inheritance); that Joseph's
arms and hands shall be made strong by the hands of the mighty God of
Jacob; that the God of Israel shall help Joseph and bless him with the
blessings of heaven above, of the deep, of the breasts, and of the womb
(i. e., he shall be blessed in his posterity); that the blessings of
Jacob had prevailed above the blessings of his progenitors, "unto the
utmost bounds of the everlasting hills," (perhaps a greater territorial
inheritance); that these blessings of Jacob which had "prevailed" above
(i. e., exceeded) the blessings of his progenitors, should be realized
by Joseph.

These are the promises of God to Joseph. But where are the evidences
either from the Bible history or from secular history that the
descendants of Joseph have ever attained to the fulfillment of these
very gracious and very remarkable promises? As a matter of fact are not
Joseph's tribes and descendants practically lost in Israel, so far as
any knowledge is obtainable from the Bible, or other Hebrew literature,
or general history? The tribe of Judah became the dominating power in
the history of Israel in Palestine, and is the only tribe in Israel
that has retained any distinctive existence in modern times. What,
then, have the promises of God to Joseph, uttered by Jacob, in his
inspired patriarchal blessings, and solemnly repeated by the great
prophet Moses, failed of their fulfillment? If not, where is the
evidence of their fulfillment? It is not to be found unless men turn
to and receive it from Joseph's record, the Book of Mormon. But the
Book of Mormon once accepted--a book that is a history, in the main,
of the descendants of Joseph, [7] behold what a fulfilment of the
prophetic blessings upon Joseph's seed is there revealed! Here in
America Joseph's descendants indeed became a multitude of nations;
here, indeed, they possessed a land blessed with the precious things
of heaven, for through Nephite prophets was made known the mind and
will of God, the coming of Messiah, and the redemption of man that
should be wrought out by Him; nay, the Son of God, in person, came
in his glorious resurrected state and taught them at first hand and
face to face the great things concerning man's salvation; inspired
apostles took up the same great theme and for centuries held a great
people closely to the path of both truth and righteousness, until the
harvest of souls in America exceeded such harvests among any other
people whatsoever. In America Joseph's descendants indeed possessed a
land noted for the precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for
the chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the precious things
of the lasting hills--the gold, the silver, the iron, the coal fields,
the oil fields, and all things else of which the mountains and hills of
America yield their rich store; a land noted for the precious things of
the earth and the fullness thereof--a land embracing all the climates
from earth's torrid equatorial regions, thence shading off both toward
the north and the south through temperate climates into the frigid
zones; a land of wonderous wealth in fertile plains and valleys, and
extensive forest tracts; a land that produces all vegetables and fruits
and fiberous growths essential to the feeding and clothing of man; a
land whose grandeur and very beauty holds the senses entranced with
its magnificence; a land sufficient for empires surrounded by fruitful
seas; a land consecrated to free institutions and to righteousness--in
a word, _the land of Joseph_.

By the descendants of Joseph migrating to this land, Joseph is truly
a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well whose branches
run over the wall; and while his descendants in this land had their
varied fortunes, dark days in which sin, both individual and national,
made dark their annals, still they had also remarkable periods of
righteousness, during which periods there were added many names to the
world's great list of warriors, statesmen and prophets, that deserve
to be remembered with the world's greatest and best characters. Of
warriors, such names as Alma, [8] Moroni, the hero of the Nephite
republic [9] (100 B. C. 56 B. C.), Mormon, Helaman, Teancum; and
though engaged in a bad cause, Amlici and Amalickiah, and many others
among the Lamanites. Of statesmen such names as the first Nephi, King
Benjamin, Mosiah II, Alma the younger, Nephihah, and Pahoran. Of the
prophets, Lehi, the first Nephi, Jacob, Mosiah I, Abinadi, Ammon, the
son of Mosiah, Alma the elder, also Alma the younger, Samuel, the
Lamanite, Nephi, the son of Helaman (last half of the century preceding
the Christian era), Nephi, the chief of Messiah's apostles, Mormon, the
author of the abridged record known as the Book of Mormon, Moroni, the
son of Mormon, and others.

Joseph's descendants in America established and maintained for a
thousand years what may be properly called a Christian civilization;
for, instructed by their prophets during the six hundred years that
they occupied the land of America, preceding the coming of Messiah,
they believed implicitly in the Christ that was to come, and looked
forward to the redemption of the human race through his atonement,
holding the reasonable view that there was as much virtue in looking
forward to the atonement of Christ and accepting in their faith his
redeeming power, as looking back upon it would have after it had become
an accomplished fact [10] For four centuries following the advent of
Christ the Nephites had, of course, the evidence of his appearing among
them and his personal instructions in the gospel, which affected the
character of their civilization.

During the time range mentioned, kingdoms, republics and Christian
ecclesiastical governments obtained. Such science and arts as might
naturally develop from a colony of enlightened Hebrews migrating from
Palestine to America six hundred years B. C., flourished; and the
ruined monuments of civilization seen in America were reared in part
by their hands; the extent of these monuments of civilization, and the
degree of civilization they represent are questions that have already
been considered. [11]

The Book of Mormon is also big with the promise of future events
concerning the redemption and glorification of the descendants of
Joseph in this promised land of America--the land of Joseph, for so
it is declared to be by the Lord Jesus himself. Addressing the twelve
disciples whom he had called to the ministry in the western world he

    Ye are my disciples; and ye are a light unto this people, who are
    a remnant of the house of Joseph. And behold, this is the land of
    your inheritance; and the Father hath given it unto you. [12]

The Book of Mormon makes known the fact that upon this land of Joseph
is to be founded a great city called Zion, or a New Jerusalem. The
risen Messiah, while still teaching the gospel in person to the
Nephites, and speaking upon this subject, said:

    And it shall come to pass that I will establish my people, O house
    of Israel. And behold, this people will I establish in this land,
   [referring to the continents of America], unto the fulfilling of
    the covenant which I made with your father Jacob; and it shall be
    a New Jerusalem. And the powers of heaven shall be in the midst of
    this people; yea, even I will be in the midst of you. [13]

Continuing his discourse he said:

    For it shall come to pass, saith the Father, that at that day
    whosoever will not repent and come unto my beloved Son, them will I
    cut off from among my people, O house of Israel; and I will execute
    vengeance and fury upon them, even as upon the heathen, such as
    they have not heard. But if they repent, and hearken unto my words,
    they shall come in unto the covenant, and be numbered among this
    the remnant of Jacob, unto whom I have given this land for their
    inheritance, and they shall assist my people, the remnant of Jacob,
    and also, as many of the house of Israel as shall come, that they
    may build a city, which shall be called the New Jerusalem; and then
    shall they assist my people that they may be gathered in, who are
    scattered upon all the face of the land, in unto the New Jerusalem.
    And then shall the power of heaven come down among them; and I will
    also be in their midst. [14]

Moroni, however, is still more explicit. He represents that the
Jaredite prophet Ether saw the days of Christ, and he spake concerning
a new Jerusalem upon the land of America.

    And he spake also concerning the house of Israel, and the Jerusalem
    from whence Lehi should come; after it should be destroyed, it
    should be built up again a holy city unto the Lord, wherefore it
    could not be a New Jerusalem, for it had been in a time of old, but
    it should be built up again, and become a holy city of the Lord;
    and it should be built unto the house of Israel; and that a New
    Jerusalem should be built up upon this land, unto the remnant of
    the seed of Joseph, for which things there has been a type; for
    as Joseph brought his father down into the land of Egypt, even so
    he died there; wherefore the Lord brought a remnant of the seed
    of Joseph out of the land of Jerusalem, that he might be merciful
    unto the seed of Joseph, that they should perish not, even as he
    was merciful unto the father of Joseph, that he should perish not;
    wherefore the remnant of the house of Joseph shall be built upon
    this land; and it shall be a land of their inheritance; and they
    shall build up a holy city unto the Lord, like unto the Jerusalem
    of old; and they shall no more be confounded, until the end come,
    when the earth shall pass away. [15]

The continents of America, then, according to this passage, are the
inheritance of Joseph, and here a holy city is to be built unto
the Lord that shall be the capital of the western world, a New
Jerusalem--Zion. This city is to be founded and glorified by the
multitudinous descendants of Joseph, who will be gathered into the
land, and also those who will unite with them in righteousness--in so
great a work--especially the Gentile races; and together they shall
be established in peaceful possession of the land to the end of the
world. The exaltation and glory of this predicted future empire for
the descendants of Joseph and the Gentile races--the grandeur of its
civilization and the security of its righteousness; the brilliancy
of its achievements; the excellence of its physical comforts and the
beauty and simplicity of both its individual and community life, may
not yet be apprehended, though they may be partly seen in the light
of modern civilized life; sufficiently seen by aid of that light to
establish confidence that realization will outrun the dreams of the
ancient prophets, all glorious as they seem.

The Book of Mormon throughout is true to this Josephic idea; it is
impregnated with it. Joseph is the central figure throughout. His
spirit runs through the whole scheme of the book. We learn from
the Book of Mormon of a great Seer that is to arise from among the
descendants of this Patriarch Joseph, to bring forth the word of the
Lord to them, a thing quite in keeping with the important part to be
taken by Joseph and his seed in the affairs of the western world in
the last days. The matter is mentioned by Lehi in connection with a
blessing he was giving his own son Joseph, born to him while in the
wilderness, enroute from Palestine to America:

    And now, Joseph, my last born, whom I have brought out of the
    wilderness of mine afflictions, may the Lord bless thee forever,
    for thy seed shall not utterly be destroyed. For behold, thou art
    the fruit of my loins; and I am a descendant of Joseph, who was
    carried captive into Egypt. And great were the covenants of the
    Lord, which he made unto Joseph; wherefore, Joseph truly saw our
    day. And he obtained a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit
    of his loins, the Lord God would raise up a righteous branch unto
    the house of Israel; not the Messiah, but a branch which was to
    be broken off; nevertheless to be remembered in the covenants of
    the Lord, that the Messiah should be made manifest unto them in
    the latter days, in the spirit of power, unto the bringing of them
    out of darkness unto light; yea, out of hidden darkness and out of
    captivity unto freedom. For Joseph truly testified, saying: a Seer
    shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice Seer unto the
    fruit of my loins. Yea, Joseph truly said, Thus saith the Lord unto
    me: A choice Seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins;
    and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins. And
    unto him will I give commandment, that he shall do a work for the
    fruit of thy loins, his brethren, which shall be of great worth
    unto them, even to the bringing of them to the knowledge of the
    covenants which I have made with thy fathers. And I will give unto
    him a commandment, that he shall do none other work, save the work
    which I shall command him. And I will make him great in mine eyes;
    for he shall do my work. And he shall be great like unto Moses,
    whom I have said I would raise up unto you, to deliver my people, O
    house of Israel. And Moses will I raise up out of the fruit of thy
    loins; and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto
    the seed of thy loins; and not to the bringing forth my word only,
    saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall
    have already gone forth among them. Wherefore, the fruit of thy
    loins shall write; and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write;
    and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also
    that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah,
    shall grow together, unto the confounding of false doctrines, and
    laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit
    of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers
    in the latter days; and also to the knowledge of my covenants,
    saith the Lord. And out of weakness he shall be made strong, in
    that day when my work shall commence among all my people, unto the
    restoring thee, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.

    And thus prophesied Joseph, saying: Behold, that Seer will the Lord
    bless; and they, that seek to destroy him, shall be confounded; for
    this promise, which I have obtained of the Lord, of the fruit of my
    loins, shall be fulfilled. Behold, I am sure of the fulfilling of
    this promise. And his name shall be called after me; and it shall
    be after the name of his father. And he shall be like unto me; for
    the things which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand, by the
    power of the Lord shall bring forth my people unto salvation. [16]

The reader will observe that this ancient prophecy is fulfilled in
the person of the Prophet Joseph Smith, who, both in his name, his
character and his work, meets completely the terms of the prophecy. [17]

One other matter in connection with the Patriarch Joseph I would
mention, insignificant perhaps in comparison of the greater things we
have been considering, yet really important for that it is made up of
those details so apt to be overlooked by an imposter who would attempt
to palm off upon the world, as a revelation, such a work as the Book of

It will be remembered that after Lehi's colony had journeyed some days
in the wilderness, the prophet-leader sent his sons back to Jerusalem
to obtain a copy of the Hebrew scriptures, and the genealogies of his
fathers. This copy of the scriptures and genealogies the sons of Lehi
obtained from one Laban, a man evidently of some considerable influence
in Jerusalem. This record was written in Egyptian characters. And now
to the point where these facts touch the Josephic idea of the Book of

Joseph, it must be remembered, attained the position of a prince in
Egypt, when that nation was doubtless the first political power of
the world, and in the kingdom was made second only to the Pharaoh
himself, so that he was a man of very high dignity, a fact not likely
to be forgotten by his posterity. He unquestionably was deeply learned
in all things Egyptian, including the written language, most likely
that form of it called the hieratic,--which, as well as the old
hieroglyphics, was used in the Egyptian sacerdotal style of writing.
I think I am justified in the conclusion that Joseph was learned in
this writing since he took to wife Asenath, daughter of the high
priest of Heliopolis, or On, and thus became closely associated with,
if not actually identified with, the priestly caste of Egypt. The
deeply religious character of the Patriarch and of his race would
also naturally interest him in the religious lore of so profoundly a
religious country as Egypt. Is it not possible that these facts would
be an incentive to his posterity to keep alive among them this Egyptian
learning of their great ancestor?

To Joseph, be it remembered, was given the birthright in Israel,
through Ephraim. Laban, of whom the sons of Lehi obtained the Egyptian
records, was a descendant of Joseph, [18] doubtless in line of the
elder sons since he kept the genealogies and also this Egyptian copy of
the holy writings.

Lehi was an Egyptian scholar [19] and was enabled to read this version
of the Hebrew scriptures and his genealogy recorded in Egyptian

This Egyptian record became the foundation of Nephite sacred
literature, that is, for the most part, their sacred records were
engraven in Egyptian characters, modified somewhat by them and called
the "reformed Egyptian." [20]

Let us consider these facts in condensed and succinct form:--

(1) Joseph, son of Jacob, he becomes a prince in Egypt, marries a
daughter of the prince On, doubtless becomes learned in Egyptian lore.

(2) Undoubtedly these facts would prove an incentive to his posterity
to perpetuate among them the Egyptian learning of their great ancestor.

(3) To Joseph is given the birthright in Israel through his younger
son, Ephraim.

(4) Laban, of whom the sons of Lehi obtained the Egyptian copy of the
Hebrew scriptures and genealogies was a descendant of Joseph, doubtless
in the line of the elder sons since he kept the genealogies and the
Egyptian copy of the holy writings.

(5) Lehi is an Egyptian scholar and is able to read this version of the
Hebrew scriptures.

(6) This Egyptian copy of the Hebrew scriptures becomes the foundation
of the Nephite literature.

Thus we have a series of facts that coalesce remarkably with the claims
made for the Nephite record, that it was written in "reformed," that
is, changed, Egyptian character, yet these circumstances are only
mentioned in an obscure, incidental way. They would never be worked out
by an imposter; and were never referred to by Joseph Smith or any of
his immediate associates as being valuable evidences in support of the
claims of the book. I cannot help thinking, however, that they are so,
and for that reason call attention to them here.


_The prophecies of Isaiah on the Coming Forth of the Book of Mormon._

In the Book of Isaiah's prophecy is found the following remarkable

    Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken
    but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. For the
    Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath
    closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he
    covered. And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of
    a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned,
    saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it
    is sealed: and the book is delivered to him that is not leaned,
    saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I am not learned.
    Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with
    their mouth, and with their lips do honor me, but have removed
    their hearts far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the
    precept of men: therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous
    work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder: for
    the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding
    of their prudent men shall be hid. Woe unto them that seek deep
    to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the
    dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us? Surely your
    turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's
    clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not?
    or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had not
    understanding? Is it not yet a very little while, and Lebanon shall
    be turned into a fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be a
    forest? And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book,
    and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of
    darkness. The meek also shall increase their joy in the Lord, and
    the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel. For the
    terrible one is brought to naught, and the scorner is consumed,
    and all that watch for iniquity are cut off: that make a man an
    offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the
    gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of naught. Therefore
    thus saith the Lord, who redeemed Abraham, concerning the house of
    Jacob, Jacob shall not now be ashamed, neither shall his face now
    wax pale. But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands,
    in the midst of him, they shall sanctify my name, and sanctify the
    Holy One of Jacob, and shall fear the God of Israel. They also that
    erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured
    shall learn doctrine. [21]

In the Book of Mormon we have a Nephite version of this prophecy taken
from the writings of Isaiah which, it will be remembered, were included
in those scriptures which Lehi's colony brought from Jerusalem. The
first Nephi applies this prophecy to the record of his own people, the
Book of Mormon, and the circumstance attendant upon its coming forth in
the last days; all of which will be found in the 27th chapter of second
Nephi. In the Nephite version of the prophecy it is made clear that the
reasons for keeping the original book from the world is the fact that
a portion of it was sealed. The opening verses of the 27th chapter of
II Nephi shift the scene of this prophecy to the land inhabited by the
Nephites, that is, to America, and describes the spiritual darkness
both in that land and in all the nations of the earth, after which the
record says:

    And it shall come to pass, that the Lord shall bring forth unto you
    the words of a book, and they shall be the words of them which have
    slumbered. And behold the book shall be sealed: and in the book
    shall be a revelation from God, from the beginning of the world to
    the end thereof. Wherefore, because of the things which are sealed
    up, the things which are sealed shall not be delivered in the day
    of the wickedness and abominations of the people. Wherefore the
    book shall be kept from them. But the book shall be delivered unto
    a man, and he shall deliver the words of the book, which are the
    words of those who have slumbered in the dust; and he shall deliver
    these words unto another; but the words which are sealed he shall
    not deliver, neither shall he deliver the book. For the book shall
    be sealed by the power of God, and the revelation which was sealed
    shall be kept in the book until the own due time of the Lord, that
    they may come forth; for behold, they reveal all things from the
    foundation of the world unto the end thereof. And the day cometh
    that the words of the book which are sealed shall be read upon the
    house tops; and they shall be read by the power of Christ: and all
    things shall be revealed unto the children of men, and which ever
    will be, even unto the end of the earth. [22]

Then follows the declaration that there shall be Three Special
Witnesses to behold the book by the power of God, and a Few other
Witnesses that shall view it according to the will of God. Following
the description of the coming forth of this book is a description
also of the spiritual awakening among men in much the same order and
phraseology as the latter part of Isaiah's prophecy.

Of course this prophecy was fulfilled in the several events we have
already noted which resulted in the coming forth of the Book of Mormon
and the accompanying testimony of the Witnesses thereof. [23] That is
to say, it was fulfilled in the Nephite record being brought forth,
after so many ages, and becoming, to those who receive it, as the words
of those who have slumbered--the speech out of the ground--the familiar
voice from the dust; by Joseph Smith and Martin Harris delivering the
transcript of characters from the Nephite record to Dr. Samuel Mitchell
and Professor Anthon, "the words of the book that was sealed" were
delivered by men to those that were learned, saying, read this, I pray
you; by the answer of these learned men to the effect--mockingly, on
incidentally learning that the book was sealed--that they could not
read a sealed book; by the book being delivered to the one that was
not learned, Joseph Smith, who marveled that one not learned should be
required to translate the book; by the Lord disdaining those who draw
near to him with their mouths, and with their lips honored him, while
their hearts were far removed from him, and their fear toward him was
taught by the precepts of men; by the Lord proceeding to do a marvelous
work and a wonder, by which the wisdom of the world's wise men became
as naught; by exalting the wisdom of God above the wisdom of men; by
making the deaf to hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the
blind to see out of obscurity; by increasing the joy of the meek in
the Lord, and making the poor among men to rejoice in the Holy One of
Israel; by expressing his scorn for those who make a man an offender
for a word--(does he have in mind those who would reject the Book of
Mormon because of the imperfections of its language?); by declaring the
speedy redemption of the House of Israel--by the return of the favor of
the Lord to Jacob, whose face shall no more wax pale; by making those
who erred in spirit come to understanding, and they that murmured to
learning doctrine--all of which events have followed or are in process
of developing as a sequence to the coming forth of this American
volume of scripture, the record of Joseph, by which the world is being
enlightened upon the enlarged glory of Israel, both passed and that
which is yet to be.

The great difficulty concerning this prophecy being made to apply to
the Nephite record and its coming forth will be in the transference of
its scenes from Palestine to America. The opening verse of the chapter
begins with a reference to Jerusalem:

    Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David dwelt! add ye year
    to year; let them kill sacrifices. Yet I will distress Ariel, and
    there shall be heaviness and sorrow. [24]

"Ariel, the city where David dwelt," too plainly designates Jerusalem
to admit of any doubt; and it would seem that all that immediately
follows would be related to David's city, Jerusalem, that is, the
siege--the destruction--the humiliation--the speaking low out of the
dust--the terrible ones that shall become as chaff--and the destruction
that shall come upon those nations that fight against "Ariel"--all
this, I say, at first glance seems to relate to Jerusalem, or "Ariel,"
and makes the transference of the remaining prophetic parts of the
chapter to America and the coming forth of the Nephite record somewhat
difficult. Still, in the second verse of the chapter there is a sudden
transition from "Ariel" to another place that shall be unto the Lord
"_as_" Ariel; and on this point the late Orson Pratt was wont to say:

    The prophet [Isaiah] predicts, first, the distress that should come
    upon Ariel, and, secondly, predicts another event that should be
    unto the Lord "as Ariel." This last event is expressed in these
    words, "And it shall be unto me AS Ariel." How was it with Ariel?
    Her people was to be distressed and afflicted with "heaviness and
    sorrow." How was it to be with the people or nations who should be
    "as Ariel," is clearly portrayed in the 3rd and 4th verses: "And
    I will camp against thee round about, and will lay siege against
    thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee; and thou
    shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy
    speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be as of
    one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech
    shall whisper out of the dust." Now, we ask, What nation upon the
    earth has been visited with a distress resembling that of Ariel
    or Jerusalem? We answer that the Book of Mormon informs us that
    the nation of Nephites who were a remnant of Joseph inhabited
    ancient America, were brought down to the ground by their enemies.
    Hundreds of thousands were slaughtered in their terrible wars.
    Their distress truly may be said to be "as Ariel." Ariel was sorely
    distressed from time to time, and forts and other fortifications
    raised against her--similar judgments happened to the remnant of
    Joseph. Isaiah does not say that Ariel shall speak out of the
    ground, but he clearly shows that the nation which should be
    distressed "as Ariel," after being brought down, should speak out
    of the ground. The words of the prophets of Jerusalem or Ariel,
    never spoke from the ground, their speech was never "low out of
    the dust." But the words of the prophets among the remnant of
    Joseph have spoken from the ground, and their written "speech" has
    whispered out of the dust. [25]

To this also may be added the further reflection that the coming forth
of the Nephite record, the circumstances attendant upon that event, the
results of enlarged knowledge concerning doctrine and the enlightenment
of the world concerning Israel in America, and the future glory that
will attend upon the restoration of that ancient people--all this
blends with the remaining prophecies of Issiah's 29th chapter, and of
which, nowhere else, have we any account of their fulfillment. We must,
therefore, say either that these remarkable prophecies of Isaiah have
not yet been fulfilled, or that they are fulfilled in connection with
the experiences of the Nephites in America, and the coming forth of
their abridged scriptures, the Book of Mormon.


_The Prophecy of Messiah in Relation to the_ "_Other Sheep_"_ than_
Those in Palestine that Must Hear His Voice.

In St. John's gospel we have the following statement and prophecy from
the lips of Messiah himself:

    I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As
    the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father; and I lay down my
    life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not of this
    fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and
    there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. [26]

The usual explanation of the prophetic part of this passage is that
Jesus here makes reference to the Gentiles as being the other sheep.
One great commentary says:

    He means the perishing gentiles already his "sheep" in the love of
    his heart and the purpose of his grace to "bring them" in due time.

Then again the phrase "they shall hear my voice" is explained to mean:

    This is not the language of mere foresight that they [the Gentiles]
    would believe, but the expression of a purpose to draw them to
    himself by an inward and efficacious call, which would infallibly
    issue in their spontaneous accession to him. [27]

Against this exposition, however, there stands out the fact that
when Jesus was importuned by his apostles to heed the prayers of the
Cananitish woman, in the coasts of Tyre, he said to them: "I am not
sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel." [28] Therefore,
when he says in John, "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold;
them also I must bring and they shall hear my voice and there shall
be one fold and one shepherd," he certainly had reference to some
branch of the House of Israel and not to the Gentiles. When the Messiah
appeared among the Nephites who, it will be remembered, were a branch
of the House of Israel, and a very great branch, too, as we have seen
since they are descendants of Joseph,--Messiah declared that it was in
that visit to the Nephites that the terms of his New Testament prophecy
were fulfilled. The occasion of his making known this truth to the
Nephites was when he chose the Twelve Disciples in the western world,
and gave them their commission. The passage follows:

    And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words, he
    said unto those twelve whom he had chosen, ye are my disciples;
    and ye are a light unto this people, who are a remnant of the
    house of Joseph. And behold, this is the land of your inheritance;
    and the Father hath given it unto you. And not at any time hath
    the Father given me commandment that I should tell it unto your
    brethren at Jerusalem; neither at any time hath the Father given
    me commandment, that I should tell unto them concerning the other
    tribes of the house of Israel, whom the Father hath led away out
    of the land. This much did the Father command me, that I should
    tell unto them, that other sheep I have, which are not of this
    fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice;
    and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. And now because
    of stiffneckedness and unbelief, they understood not my word:
    therefore I was commanded to say no more of the Father concerning
    this thing unto them. But, verily, I say unto you, that the Father
    hath commanded me, and I tell it unto you, that ye were separated
    from among them because of their iniquity; therefore it is because
    of their iniquity, that they know not of you. And verily, I say
    unto you again, that the other tribes hath the Father separated
    from them; and it is because of their [the Jews'] iniquity, that
    they knew not of them. And verily, I say unto you, that ye are they
    of whom I said, other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them
    also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be
    one fold, and one shepherd. [29]

In view of the fact already pointed out that Jesus could not have had
reference to the Gentiles in this prophecy concerning "other sheep,"
I may say of this prophecy as I did of those in the 29th chapter of
Isaiah, that either we must say that we have no knowledge of the
fulfillment of this very remarkable New Testament prediction, or else
we must say that it had its fulfillment as the Book of Mormon teaches,
in the advent and ministry of Jesus to the branch of the House of
Israel in America.

I have pursued the matter of evidence and argument from the Jewish
scriptures to the truth of the Book of Mormon as far as it was my
original purpose to do so, referring those who care to enter more
minutely into this branch of the subject to the treatment of other
Elders who have devoted their works to it. [30]


1. One of the earliest writers in the Church in support of the claims
of the Book of Mormon was Elder Charles Thompson. He published a work
at Batavia, N. Y., in 1841 consisting of 250 pages. The title of the
book was "Evidences in Proof of the Book of Mormon Being a Divinely
Inspired Record, Written by the Forefathers of the Natives Whom we Call
Indians." It dwells at length on the scripture proofs of the divine
authenticity of the book, the nature of which may be judged from the
following statement of what the author expects to prove:

"In treating on this subject, I shall observe the following order, viz:
I shall first prove by the Prophets, that God will literally gather
Israel, the literal seed of Jacob, from all nations, unto their own
land, which God gave unto their fathers, by promise.

"Second: When he shall set his hand to bring to pass this gathering,
he will first lift up an ensign on the mountains for the nations--set
up his standard to the people, and set a sign among them. And then
immediately he will commission officers and send them to the nations,
bearing this ensign, to declare his glory among the Gentiles, and to
fish out and hunt up Israel, and bring them to their own land for an
offering unto the Lord.

"Third: The ensign, standard, and sign, consists of a book--a record of
the tribe of Joseph, taken by the Lord and put with the Bible (that is,
published to the nations as the Bible now is).

"Fourth: This record of Joseph is to come out of the earth in America
because Ephraim's seed dwell there.

"Fifth: America is a promised land to Joseph, and God brought a remnant
of his seed here to possess it.

"Sixth: God will make use of men as instruments in bringing this book

"Seventh: This generation is the time when this gathering is to take
place; consequently the time when this book is to come forth.

"Eighth: The Book of Mormon is this book, and the Elders of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are the officers commissioned to
bear this sign to the nations, and to declare God's glory among the
gentiles and gather Israel." (Evidences in Proof of the Book of Mormon,
pp. 7, 8).

The writings of Elders Parley P. Pratt (who preceded Elder Thompson in
this field by three or four years), and Orson Pratt upon this subject,
the first in the Voice of Warning, 1837; the second in his work on
Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, England, 1850-1, are too
well known to require any summary as their works are still current.

2. Jeremiah xxxi: 9.

3. I. Chronicles v: 1, 2.

4. Genesis xlviii: 12-20.

5. Genesis xlix: 22-26.

6. Deut. xxxiii: 13-18.

7. I have already, at pages 167-8, and note, called attention to the
fact that the colony of Lehi was made up of families from the tribes of
Ephraim and Manasseh respectively. Orson Pratt also says, "The American
Indians are partly of the children of Manasseh though many of them are
of Ephraim through the two sons of Ishmael who came out of Jerusalem
600 B. C., and some of Judah through the loins of David and the kings
that reigned over Jerusalem." Pratt's Works, pp. 92; see also chapter
XXXIX and footnotes.

8. The reason that Alma, born late in the second century B. C., is
the first one mentioned of the Nephite warriors is not because he
was the first distinguished member of that class among the Nephites,
but because the secular history of the Nephites for the first four
centuries of their annals was lost through the criminal carelessness of
Martin Harris when he lost the 116 pages of manuscript which was the
translation of the first part of Mormon's abridgment of that Nephite
secular history. We have its place occupied by the translation of the
Smaller Plates of Nephi which record gives prominence to spiritual
things and to spiritual characters. (I. Nephi xix: 3, 4). But as
"there were brave men before Aggamemnon," so also doubtless there were
warriors among the Nephites before Alma, but in consequence of not
having a translation of the part of the record which dealt with the
affairs of government and of wars, they remain for the present, unknown
to us.

9. Not Moroni, the son of Mormon.

10. Alma xxxix: 17-19, I. Nephi xxv: 23-26, Mosiah iii: 13.

11. Chapters xxvi and xxvii.

12. III. Nephi xv: 12, 13.

13. III. Nephi xx: 21, 22.

14. III. Nephi xxi: 20-25.

15. Ether xiii: 5-8.

16. II. Nephi iii: 3-15.

I am not unmindful of the fact that the objector, with some show of
reason, could say that it would be an easy matter for an imposter to
set down such a prophecy as this--one that would coalesce with the
facts of his own life and claim it as a fulfillment of prophecy, and
hence an evidence of his calling. The shallowness of such a position
is, of course, apparent, but it is not in this way that I refer to the
circumstance, but to call attention to the fact that it is in harmony
with this Josephic idea of the Book of Mormon, and I am not at all
relying upon it in my argument as being a fulfillment of prophecy.

17. Compare I. Nephi i: 1-2. Mosiah i: 1-4. Mormon ix: 32-33.

18. "And thus my father, Lehi, did discover the genealogy of his
fathers; and Laban also was a descendant of Joseph, wherefore he and
his fathers had kept the records." I. Nephi v: 16.

19. I. Nephi i: 2. Mosiah i: 4.

20. Mormon ix: 32, 33.

21. Isaiah xxix: 9-24.

22. II. Nephi xxvii: 6-11.

23. See Vol. II, chapters iv and v.

24. Isaiah xxix: 1-2.

25. Orson Pratt's Works, p. 11.

26. St. John x: 14-16.

27. Commentary, Critical and Explanatory of the Old and New Testaments,
by Rev. Jamieson, Fausett and Brown, on St. John, ch. x. See also
Eidersheim's Life of Jesus, Vol. II., p. 192, where substantially the
same view is held.

28. Matt. xv: 24.

29. III. Nephi xv: 11-21.

30. For reference to such works see footnote, pp. 93-94.



The evidence of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to the
Book of Mormon grows out of the relation of the book to the Church.
That is to say, the Church is a sequence of the coming forth of the
book. Not that a description of the Church organization as we known it
is found in the book, or that its officers or their functions are named
in it, much less that the extent and limitations of their authority
are pointed out in it. All that pertains to the Church organization,
and largely to the development of its doctrines, all that pertains
to the Church, in fact, comes of a series of direct revelations to
Joseph Smith subsequent to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.
These revelations were given for the specific purpose of bringing
into existence the Church as it now exists, the depository of the
divine authority, in the new dispensation, and the instrumentality
for proclaiming the truth to the world, and perfecting the lives of
those who receive it. The Church, in other words, is the after-work
of the inspired Prophet who translated the Nephite record into the
English language. Bringing into existence the Church and developing
its doctrines was the continuation of the work that began with the
first vision of Joseph Smith, the visitation of the angel Moroni,
and the translation and publication of the Nephite record. Does this
continuation of the work as seen in the organization of the Church and
the development of its doctrines justify the expectations awakened by
the Book of Mormon, and the manner of its coming forth? Has anything
worth while come because of the revelation of the Book of Mormon?
The principle, "By their fruits ye shall know them" may have a wider
application than making it a mere test of ethical systems or of
religious teachers. It may be applied as a test to anything claiming to
be a truth. So that what has resulted from the coming forth of the Book
of Mormon, is a question of importance. The answer to that question
may do much either for the book's vindication or its condemnation; may
establish its truth or prove it to be utterly unworthy of its claim to
divine origin. I hold it to be a self-evident truth that a revelation
from God must not only contain matter within itself that concerns
men to know and that is worthy of God to reveal, but it must lead to
results worthy of revelation and worthy of God. It is here therefore
that the Church becomes a witness to the truth of the Book of Mormon;
for while neither the Church organization nor all its doctrines come
immediately from a description of either of these in the book's pages,
yet the Church is an outgrowth of that movement of which the Book of
Mormon may be said to be an important factor. The Book of Mormon cannot
be true and the Church of Christ fail to come into existence as an
accompanying fact. Indeed, several predictions in the Book of Mormon
clearly indicate the establishment of the Church as a sequence to the
coming forth of that record, as witness the following:

    And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall commence his work
    among all nations, kindred, tongues and people, to bring about the
    restoration of his people upon the earth. [1]

The Savior, also, in predicting the accomplishment of his work in the
last days, when the Nephite record should come forth, in speaking of
the Gentiles among whom it should be brought forth, says:

    If they will repent, and hearken unto my words, I will establish my
    church among them, and they shall come in unto the covenant, and be
    numbered among this the remnant of Jacob, unto whom I have given
    this land for their inheritance. [2]

To the first Nephi, also, it was given to behold the establishment of
the church of Christ in the last days, for he said:

    I beheld the church of the Lamp of God, and its numbers were few. *
    * * * nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were
    the Saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and
    their dominions were small, because of the wickedness of the great
    whore whom I saw. [3]

Moreover, side by side with the unfolding of the successive facts
which brought the Book of Mormon into existence, there was a series
of revelations given predicting and making for the establishment of
a Church organization. In evidence of which statement I refer to the
first visions of Joseph Smith as described by the Prophet himself in
the first volume of the Church History, [4] and especially as related
by him in the letter written to Mr. John Wentworth in 1842; also the
Prophet's account of the several visits of Moroni to him, and the
prophecies of that angel concerning the coming forth of the work of
the Lord, "and how and in what manner his kingdom was to be conducted
in the last days;" [5] also the eighteen sections of the Doctrine and
Covenants from the 2nd section to the 20th, inclusive, being those
revelations given between September, 1823, to the fore part of April,
1830--the period during which the Book of Mormon was being revealed
and translated--and in which prophetic declarations concerning the
coming forth of the Church are frequently made. The last revelation of
the series--section twenty--is the one in which the first practical
directions are given towards effecting the organization of the Church.

Who ever will look through these writings, to say nothing of frequent
allusions to the same matter throughout the Book of Mormon itself, will
be convinced that the coming forth of the book must result in bringing
into existence the Church.

The Church so brought into existence, cannot be true and the Book of
Mormon false. If the book be not true, Joseph Smith is an imposter,
a false prophet, and an imposter and false prophet cannot found a
true Church of Christ; therefore, if the Church be the true Church of
Christ, it is evidence quite conclusive that the book so inseparably
connected with it, so vitally related to it, is also true. Of course,
the conception is possible that both the Church and the book may
be false, but it is inconceivable that one could be true and the
other false. It follows therefore that whatever facts exist in the
organization and doctrines of the Church which tend to establish it as
being of divine origin, tend also to establish the divine authenticity
of the Book of Mormon.

Here we have a field of evidence and argument well nigh inexhaustible;
but much of it, I may say all of it with which I care to deal, has
already been used in volume one of New Witnesses, as follows:

Chapter XIV: "Fitness in the Development of the New Dispensation."

Chapter XV: "The Evidence of Scriptural and Perfect Doctrine."

Chapter XXIV: "The Church Founded by Joseph Smith, a Monument to His

Chapters XXV-XXVI: "Testimony of the Inspiration and Divine Calling
of Joseph Smith, Derived from the Comprehensiveness of the Work He

Chapter XXVII: "Evidence of Inspiration Derived from the Wisdom in the
Plan Proposed for the Betterment of the Temporal Condition of Mankind."

Chapters XXVIII, XXIX, XXX: "Evidence of Divine Inspiration in Joseph
Smith Derived from the Prophet's Doctrines in Regard to the Extent of
the Universe, Man's Place in It, and His Doctrine Respecting God."

The evidences and the arguments in all these chapters, then, must be
considered as appropriated here, and made part of my argument for the
truth of the Book of Mormon, as well as for the divine origin of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. After thus appropriating
all this body of evidence and argument from these chapters in the first
volume of New Witnesses, I feel justified in saying: It is the Church
that bears witness to the truth of the Book of Mormon rather than the
Book of Mormon which bears witness to the Church. Nor is this said in
disparagement of the Book of Mormon. It is only saying that what comes
of the book is greater than the book itself, that the stately oak is
greater than the acorn from which it grew--a giant tree; that the whole
is greater than a part; that the work in all its fullness is greater
than one of the incidents in which that work had its origin.


1. II. Nephi xxx: 8.

2. III. Nephi xxi: 22.

3. I. Nephi xiv: 12.

4. Chapter i.

5. History of the Church, Vol. I., ch. ii.




_Of the Unity and Diversity of Style._

As already set forth in previous pages, the Book of Mormon, with
reference to the original documents from which it was translated, is
made up of two classes of writings:

1. Original, unabridged Nephite records;

2. Mormon and Moroni's abridgment of Nephite and Jaredite records.

The translation of the unabridged Nephite records comprises the first
157 pages of current editions of the Book of Mormon. The rest of the
623 pages--except where we have the words of Mormon and Moroni at
first hand, or here and there direct quotations by them from older
records--are Mormon's abridgment of other Nephite records, and Moroni's
abridgment of a Jaredite record. It is quite evident that there would
be a marked difference in the construction of these two divisions of
the book. How there came to be unabridged and abridged records in
Mormon's collection of plates has been explained at length in previous
pages, [1] so that it is now only necessary to say that when Joseph
Smith lost his translation of the first part of Mormon's abridgment of
the Nephite records, comprised in the 116 pages of manuscript which he
entrusted to Martin Harris, he replaced the lost part by translating
the smaller plates of Nephi which make up the first 157 pages of the
Book of Mormon before referred to. Now, if there is no difference in
the style between this part of the Book of Mormon translated from
the small plates of Nephi, and Mormon's abridgment of the larger
plates, that fact would constitute very strong evidence against the
claims of the Book of Mormon. On the other hand, if one finds the
necessary change in style between these two divisions of the book,
it will be important incidental evidence in its support. Especially
will this be conceded when the likelihood that neither Joseph Smith
nor his associates would have sufficient knowledge of things literary
to appreciate the importance of the difference of style demanded in
the two parts of the record. Fortunately the evidence on this point
is all that can be desired. The writers whose works were engraven on
the smaller plates of Nephi employ the most direct style, and state
what they have to say in the first person, without explanation or
interpolations by editors or commentators or any evidence of abridgment
whatsoever, though, of course, they now and then make quotations from
the Hebrew scriptures which the Nephite colony brought with them from
Jerusalem. The following passages illustrate their style.



    1. I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was
    taught somewhat in all the learning of my father; and having seen
    many afflictions in the course of my days--nevertheless, having
    been highly favored of the Lord in all my days; yea, having a great
    knowledge of the goodnesss and the mysteries of God, therefore I
    make a record of my proceedings in my days.

    2. Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which
    consists of the learning of the Jews, and the language of the

    3. And I know that the record which I make is true; and I make it
    with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge. etc.

    THE BOOK OF JACOB. [The brother of Nephi.]


    1. For behold, it came to pass that fifty and five years had passed
    away, from the time that Lehi left Jerusalem; wherefore, Nephi gave
    me, Jacob, a commandment concerning the small plates, upon which
    these things are engraven.

    2. And he gave me, Jacob, a commandment that I should write upon
    these plates, a few of the things which I considered to be most
    precious; that I should not touch, save it were lightly, concerning
    the history of this people which are called the people of Nephi,



    1. Behold, it came to pass that I, Enos, knowing my father that he
    was a just man: for he taught me in his language, and also in the
    nurture and admonition of the Lord. And blessed be the name of God
    for it.

    2. And I will tell you of the wrestle which I had before God,
    before I received a remission of my sins:

    3. Behold, I went to hunt beasts in the forest; and the words which
    I had often heard my father speak concerning eternal life, and the
    joy of the saints, sunk deep into my heart, etc.

    And so it continues with each of the nine writers in this division
    of the Book of Mormon. But now note how marked the difference is
    when we come to Mormon's abridgment of the Nephite record which
    begins with the book of Mosiah:



    1. And now there was no more contention in all the land of
    Zarahemla, among all the people who belonged to King Benjamin, so
    that king Benjamin had continual peace all the remainder of his

    2. And it came to pass that he had three sons; and he called their
    names Mosiah, and Helorum, and Helaman. And he caused that they
    should be taught in all the language of his fathers, that thereby
    they might become men of understanding; and that they might know
    concerning the prophecies which had been spoken by the mouths of
    their fathers, which were delivered them by the hand of the Lord.

    So also in the abridgment of the book of Alma:



    1. Now it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of the
    judges over the people of Nephi, from this time forward, king
    Mosiah having gone the way of all the earth, having warred a good
    warfare, walking uprightly before God, leaving none to reign in his
    stead; nevertheless he established laws, and they were acknowledged
    by the people; therefore they were obliged to abide by the laws he
    had made.

    2. And it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of Alma
    in the judgment seat, there was a man brought before him to be
    judged; a man who was large, and was noted for his much strength,

And so throughout the abridgment this style continues as pointed out
in chapter IX of this work. Had the style which is followed in the
abridgment found its way into the translation of the unabridged part
of the record, the reader can readily see how strong an objection it
would have constituted against the claims of the Book of Mormon. As to
style in other respects there is marked uniformity in the translation.
I have already pointed out the fact that the style of the translation
of the Book of Mormon is influenced, of course, by the translator; the
statements and ideas of the Nephite writers being set forth in such
English and in such literary style as Joseph Smith, with his limited
knowledge of language, could command; he, in his turn, of course, being
influenced in his expressions by the facts and ideas made known to him
from the Nephite record through Urim and Thummim, and the inspiration
of God under which he worked. It is useless to assert a diversity of
style where it does not exist, and that it does not exist in the Book
of Mormon except as to the matter of a distinction between Jaredite
and Nephite proper names, hereafter to be noted, and the distinction
between the abridged records and those unabridged--to the extent just
pointed out--it would be easy, though unnecessary, to demonstrate;
since any one may satisfy himself by even a casual inspection of the
Book of Mormon itself.

The demand for diversity of style in the various parts of the
translation of the Book of Mormon is urged too strongly. It is
sometimes represented, even by believers in the Book of Mormon, that
the volume contains the compiled writings of a long line of inspired
scribes extending through a thousand years, written not only at
different times but under varying conditions, and that unity of style
under such circumstances is not to be expected, and did it occur it
would be fatal to the claims made for the Book of Mormon! Now, as a
matter of fact, there is great unity of style in the translation of
the Book of Mormon which any one can verify who will read it; and
properly so, I insist; for the reason that general unity of style
is not incompatible with the theory of the work's construction and
translation. First of all this long line of inspired writers that
should give to us diversity of style in their writings is reduced
really to a very small matter when the facts in the case are
considered. We have already seen, in chapter IX, that all told there
are but eleven writers in the Book of Mormon. The work of nine of these
runs through only 400 years of Nephite history--from the time Lehi's
colony left Jerusalem to the time when the Nephites, under Mosiah I.,
joined the people of Mulek, some 200 years B. C. Then we have the works
of no Nephite writer until we come to Mormon, who makes his abridgment
of the Nephite records in the closing years of the 4th century A. D.
So that 600 years of the 1,000 through which the long line of Nephite
writers is supposed to run is lifted bodily from the "time range." I
say we have no Nephite writings between the works of the first group
of nine Nephite writers (600-200 B. C.) to the writings of Mormon
(400 A. D.) I should say, we have no such writings except where here
and there Mormon, in his abridgment, makes a direct quotation from
some intervening writer between those two periods. Such quotations,
however, are neither numerous nor long, and in many instances one is
left in doubt as to whether supposed quotations are verbatim or merely
the substance of the original documents given by Mormon. What has led
to confusion in these matters is that the books of "Mosiah," "Alma,"
"Helaman," "III Nephi," etc., are not really the books of these men
whose names respectively they bear, but are Mormon's abridgment of
those books to which abridgment he has given the name of the book he
abridged. Then, again, of these eleven writers we have already shown
(chapter IX) that the first group of nine writers supplied but 157
pages of the book. Of these Nephi writes 127 1/2 pages; and his brother,
Jacob, 21 1/2; making in all 149 of the 157; leaving but 8 pages for
the other seven writers; and as Enos, who follows Jacob, writes 2 1/2
pages of the remaining 8, there is left but 5 1/2 pages for the remaining
six writers. It should be kept in mind, too, that the whole nine
authors were writing in the first 400 years of Nephite times; that
Jacob and Nephi lived much of their lives together, therefore, in the
same period of time, under similar conditions, with the same little
colony of people. Hence there was not much to give diversity of style
to their writings, and the few paragraphs left for the remaining seven
writers could not be sufficient to develop very much diversity of style
in composition. So that the diversity of style clamored for, so far as
this group of nine writers is concerned, is not very insistent.

Turning now to the writers of the Book of Mormon who come six hundred
years later, Mormon and Moroni, they are contemporaries, father and
son. They lived in the same age. One abridged the history of the
Nephites, the other a brief history of the Jaredites. So that their
work is similar in character, is wrought in the same age, and hence
great diversity of style is not to be expected.

Another factor in the question of style is that in the "time range" of
1,000 years through which it is assumed the Book of Mormon is being
composed, there is not much change in the manners or customs of the
people--not very widely varying conditions. It must be remembered that
the colonies which came to America in the sixth century B. C. were
made up of men and women who were civilized. They brought with them a
knowledge of the civilization in the midst of which they had lived.
They also had some Hebrew literature with them, although written in
Egyptian characters; also the Hebrews ideas of government and law,
and these ideas were promulgated among the people as they increased
in numbers and grew into a nation. The before mentioned "time range"
of 1,000 years was a period in the world's history when there was no
such revolutions taking place in manners, customs, and progress in
civilization as is known to our own age. In the western world, as in
the eastern, in the period under consideration, human affairs in the
matter of developing civilization, were well nigh stationary. The same
methods and implements of warfare were employed at the close of the
period as were used at its beginning. So in agriculture, commerce, and
in the sciences and arts. Not nearly so many changes took place in
that thousand years as have taken place within the last hundred years.
Hence, so far as changing conditions affecting style of composition
during the time limit of 1,000 years is concerned, there is nothing
which demands great diversity of style.

Another item at this point should be considered with reference to a
misapprehension of the character of the Book of Mormon. It has been
frequently urged by writers against the Book of Mormon that it pretends
to be the national or racial literature of the peoples of the western
hemisphere, and that in the light of such pretentions it is utterly
contemptible. Such a conception of the Book of Mormon, however, is
entirely unwarranted, since no such claims are made for it by those
at all acquainted with its character. No one acquainted with the book
could for a moment hold it up as the national literature of either the
Jaredite empire or of the Nephite monarchy or republic, any more than
he could regard the single work of Josephus on the "Antiquities of
the Jews" as the national literature of the Hebrew race or nation; or
Doctor William Smith's "Condensed History of England" (less than four
hundred pages) as the national literature of the British empire.

The Book of Mormon was constructed in this manner: Let us suppose
that a writer has before him the national literature of the old Roman
empire; the works of Livy, Sallust, Virgil, Caesar, Terrance, Cicero,
and the rest. The account of the chief events mentioned in these
several volumes he condenses in his own style into a single volume.
Coming to the annals of Tacitus, however, he is so well pleased with
some portions of them that notwithstanding the events Tacitus narrates
parallel some parts of his own abridgment of the history, he places
them, without editing or changing them in the least, with his own
writings. This work, upon his death, falls into the hands of his son,
who is also a writer. In the course of the second writer's researches
he accidentally, or providentially, as you will, discovers the works
of the Greek historian, Xenophon. He considers this writer's history
of Greece of such importance--especially his history of the "Retreat
of the Ten Thousand"--that he condenses into a few pages the events
related by Xenophon and binds them in with his father's work, with such
comments of his own as he considers necessary. As the first writer's
abridgment of some of the Roman books would not be the national
literature of Rome, so also the abridgment of Xenophon's writings
would not be the national literature of Greece; and as this supposed
case exactly illustrates the manner in which the Book of Mormon was
constructed by Mormon and Moroni, the absurdity of regarding the book
so produced as the national or racial literature of the peoples who
have inhabited the western world, will be apparent.


_Characteristics of an Abridgment._

In addition to the changes from the first to the third person already
noted between the first group of Nephite authors, whose writings are
unabridged, and Mormon and Moroni's abridgment, there is one other item
which further exhibits the consistency between the style and language
of the book with the theory of its construction, viz: The style of
Mormon and Moroni's part of the work is pronouncedly the style of an
abridgment. Its general characteristics have already been considered in
chapter ix., and it only remains here to say that the body of the work
is Mormon's abridgment of the chief events from the Nephite annals,
with occasional verbatim quotations from those works, and his own
running comments upon the same. In the progress of the work one may
almost see the writer with a number of the Nephite records about him
engaged at his task. He has just recorded the thrilling events of a few
years rich in historical instances, and in closing says:

    "And thus endeth the 5th year of the reign of the Judges."

Then he strikes a period where there are but few important events in
the annals, so he passes over them lightly in this manner:

    Now it came to pass in the sixth year of the reign of the Judges
    over the people of Nephi, there were no contentions nor wars in the
    land of Zarahemla. * * * * * And it came to pass in the seventh
    year of the reign of the Judges, there were about three thousand
    five hundred souls that united themselves to the Church of God, and
    were baptized. And thus endeth the seventh year of the reign of the
    Judges over the people of Nephi; and there was continual peace in
    all that time. [2]

He closes another eventful period, in a similar manner:

    But behold there never was a happier time among the people of
    Nephi, since the days of Nephi, than in the days of Moroni; yea,
    even at this time, in the twenty and first year of the reign of the
    Judges. And it came to pass that the twenty and second year of the
    reign of the Judges also ended in peace; yea, and also the twenty
    and third year. [3]

The following is a similar example:

    And it came to pass that there was peace and exceeding great joy
    in the remainder of the forty and ninth year; yea, and also there
    was continual peace and great joy in the fiftieth year of the reign
    of the Judges. And in the fifty and first year of the reign of the
    Judges there was peace also, save it were the pride which began to
    enter into the church. [4]

Again in Helaman:

    And it came to pass that the seventy and sixth year did end in
    peace. And the seventy and seventh year began in peace; and the
    church did spread throughout the face of all the land; and the
    more part of the people, both the Nephites and the Lamanites, did
    belong to the church; and they did have exceeding great peace in
    the land, and thus ended the seventy and seventh year. And also
    they had peace in the seventy and eighth year, save it were a few
    contentions concerning the points of doctrine which had been laid
    down by the prophets. [5] * * * * * * * And thus ended the eighty
    and first year of the reign of the Judges. And in the eighty and
    second year, they began again to forget the Lord their God. And in
    the eighty and third year they began to wax strong in iniquity. And
    the eighty and fourth year, they did not mend their ways. And it
    came to pass in the eighty and fifth year, they did wax stronger
    and stronger in their pride, and in their wickedness; and thus they
    were ripened again for destruction. And thus ended the eighty and
    fifth year. [6]

Moroni's abridgment of the Jaredite record--the Book of Ether--fails
to exhibit this particular characteristic of an abridgment, owing
doubtless to the brevity of the original record he abridged--there
were but twenty-four plates in the record of Ether, and "the hundredth
part," says Moroni, "I have not written;" [7] but otherwise that book
of Ether bears all the marks of being an abridgment that the work of
Mormon does, except perhaps that the running comments of Moroni are
more frequent than Mormon's.


_Originality in Book of Mormon Names._

There is another gratifying distinction between Mormon's abridgment of
the Nephite record and Moroni's abridgment of the Jaredite record that
is also of first rate importance as an evidence of consistency in the
work. That is the quite marked distinction between Nephite and Jaredite
proper names as given in these respective parts of the record. Take for
instance the list of names of Jaredite leaders and kings and compare it
with a list of prominent Nephite leaders.





An inspection of these two lists of names discloses the fact that the
Jaredite names, with the single exception of "Shule" and "Levi," end
in consonants, while very many of the Nephite names end in a vowel;
and while many of the Nephite names also end in consonants, yet the
preponderance of Nephite names that end in vowels over Jaredite names
is considerable. I am not able to say what value attaches to this
distinction, I can only point it out as a marked distinction, and it
may be an important one.

Another distinction may be discerned in the fact that there are
more simple, and evidently root-words among the Jaredite names than
among the Nephite names; that is, there are not so many derivatives
in the former as in the latter, though in the former there are a
few. "Corihor," may have come from "Cohor;" "Coriantumr," from
"Coriantor," though it may be merely a variation of the more ancient
name "Moriancumer." "Nimarah" may have come from "Nimrod;" and "Akish"
from "Kish." But this about exhausts the derivatives among the
Jaredite names. As illustrations merely of the Nephite derivatives,
and not with a view of exhausting the list, I give the following:
"Nephihah," evidently comes from "Nephi," "Amalickiah," from "Amaleki,"
"Gidgiddoni," "Gidgiddonah," "Giddonah," and "Gideon," from "Gid,"
"Helaman" from "Helam;" "Ammoron," from "Ammon;" "Moronihah,"
from "Moroni;" "Mathonihah," from "Mathoni." This is enough for
illustration, and inspection will show the percentage of derivatives
in the Nephite names of the Book of Mormon to be not only greatly but
very greatly in excess of derivatives in the Jaredite names. And this
is what consistency demands of the Book of Mormon. The more ancient
people the simpler and fewer compound names--more root names, fewer
derivatives. William A. Wright, M. A., Librarian of Trinity College,
Cambridge, writing for the Hackett edition of Smith's Dictionary of the
Bible, says:

    Glancing a moment at the history of names and name-giving among
    the Hebrews, we readily distinguish many of those changes which
    characterize popular customs and habits in this particular among
    all peoples. In their first or ruder age their names are simple
    and "smell of nature." In the period of their highest national and
    religious development we find more compound and more allusions to
    artificial refinements. [8]

That law is found operating at least between the more ancient people
of the Book of Mormon, the Jaredites, and the more modern people, the
Nephites. While the list of names obtainable from the abridgment of the
very small fragment of a Jaredite record of the Book of Mormon does
not give sufficient data to warrant a positive conclusion, yet I think
there is discernable a tendency even in that list from the more simple
to derivative names; [9] while as between the earlier and later Nephite
times the translation from the simple to an increase of compound names
is quite marked. [10] I do not mean by this that the simpler names are
not found throughout the whole Nephite period, but that the percentage
of derivative names greatly increase in the latter times.

Referring again to the marked distinction between Jaredite and Nephite
names, I desire to call attention to the fact that the demands for this
distinction are imperative, since these peoples though they occupied
the same continent did so successively and at periods of time widely
separated. The Jaredites occupied the north continent from soon after
the dispersion of mankind from Babel until the opening of the 6th
century B. C. About the time the Jaredites were destroyed the Nephite
colony arrived in South America, and Mulek's colony in North America.
But the only person connecting the two peoples was Coriantumr (the last
of the Jaredites) through some nine months of association with the
colony of Mulek. Whether or not his race was perpetuated by marriage
into Mulek's colony is merely a matter of conjecture. [11] So far as
the Nephite connection with the Jaredites is concerned it exists only
through the Jaredite records discovered by the people of Zeniff (B. C.
123), and translated soon afterwards by Mosiah II. This translation of
the Jaredite record making known, in outline merely, the history of the
Jaredites to the Nephites, might give to the Nephites some Jaredite
names, as in the case of the noted warrior among the Nephites bearing
the name Coriantumr. [12] Still from the fact that the connection
between the Nephites and the Jaredites is so slight; and the occupancy
of the North Continent by the respective peoples separated by so long
a period of time, it could not be otherwise than that there would
be a marked distinction in proper names between the two peoples, a
distinction that will be quite apparent to the reader when he compares
the respective lists of Jaredite and Nephite names here presented
at radom; and which, had it been wanting, would have been a serious
objection to the consistency, and consequently to the claims, of the
Book of Mormon.

When the general unity of style found in the Book of Mormon is taken
into account, this distinction in proper names becomes all the more
remarkable. But it is a case where the circumstances emphatically
demand a distinction; just as the circumstances emphatically demand
a marked distinction at the transition from the unabridged writings
of the Nephite authors--written in the first person, and in so simple
and direct a style--to the abridged record of Mormon--written in the
third person and in so complex, not to say confusing, a style. Had
the Prophet Joseph's translation of the Book of Mormon failed to have
shown the distinctions at these points where such distinctions are so
imperatively demanded--in a word, had the style and language of the
book failed to be consistent with the theory of its construction--how
serious an objection the failure would have been considered! But since
the consistency of the style and language of the book with the theory
of the work's construction is established, how strong the evidence is
which that fact constitutes! And more especially when it is remembered
that neither Joseph Smith nor his associates had sufficient knowledge
of literature, to cause them to appreciate the importance of such a
consistency. The evidence that they were unconscious of the point here
made is to be found in the fact that they never alluded to it in their
life time, nor was the foregoing argument ever made by any one else
within their life time.


_Of the Nephite Custom in Naming Cities and Provinces Being Ancient._

It should be remarked that both Jaredites and Nephites named cities,
plains, valleys, mountains and provinces after the names of prominent
men, especially the men who were identified in some way with the
settlement or history of said places; so that it often happens that
names of places take on the names of men or some variation of their
names; and hence the frequent identity and more frequently the likeness
between the names of places and the names of men. Both people also
followed the custom of ancient nations, not only in naming cities
after the men who founded them or who were prominently connected with
their history, but also in giving the district of country surrounding
a city the same name as the city. Thus among the Jaredites there is
Nehor the city, and "the land [or province] of Nehor," meaning the
district of country surrounding the city of Nehor. [13] I believe
also that there was a Jaredite city of Moron, as well as a land of
Moron, although there is no specific reference to a city of that name,
but frequent references to the "land of Moron," [14] which I take to
mean the district of country surrounding the city of Moron. [15] That
this custom obtained among the Nephites is so commonly understood
that illustration is scarcely necessary, yet by way of illustration I
instance the following: The city of Bountiful, [16] and the land of
Bountiful; [17] the city of Zarahemla, [18] and the land of Zarahemla;
 [19] the city of Moroni; [20] and the land of Moroni; [21] the city of
Nephihah, [22] and the land of Nephihah; [23] the city of Manti, and
the land of Manti. [24]

That the customs here referred to are in harmony with the customs of
ancient nations I cite the following as illustrations of my statement:
Nineveh takes its name from Ninus, the son of Nimrod. Nimrod founded
the city and gave to it a variation of his son's name. [25] M. Rollin
also identifies Nimrod with Belus, the first king whom the "people
deified for his great actions," and after whom, some authorities
affirm, the noted temple of Belus within the city of Babylon was named;
and from which the city itself, as some affirm, took its name. [26] Of
course we have the statement of holy writ that Babylon received its
name from the circumstances of the Lord confounding the language of the
builders of the city, [27] "Babel" in the Hebrew meaning confusion.
Professor Hackett, however, in his contribution on the subject to
Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, while nothing the statement in
Genesis, says: "But the native (i. e. Chaldean) etymology is Ba-il 'the
gate of the god 'Il;' or perhaps more simple, 'the gate of god;' and
this no doubt was the original intention of the appellation as given
by Nimrod, though the other sense (i. e. the Bible sense) came to be
attached to it after the confusion of tongues." Hence one may say that
"Babylon" has taken its name from both circumstances. That is, from
the "Nimrod" of the Chaldeans it takes its name from its founder,
"Belus," who is Nimrod, while to the Hebrew mind it owes its name to
the circumstance of the confusion of languages.

Professor Campbell, according to Osborn, thinks that the name "Jebez,"
of Chronicles ii: 55, is "Thebes;" which originally was "Tei Jabez,"
the city named from "Jabez," and which is written without the "T" in
the hieroglyphics, that letter being only the article. [28]

Plato in his Timaeus, where he introduces the story of Atlantis, says:
"At the head of the Egyptian Delta, where the river Nile divides,
there is a certain district which is called the district of Sais,
and the great city of the district is also called Sais, and is the
city from which Amasis the king was sprung." [29] This is an incident
where the district of country takes its name from the city. Other
instances in support of the ancient custom here referred to will be
found in the case of "Rome," so called after "Romulus;" "Alexandria;
after Alexander;" "Constantinople," after "Constantine." The names of
countries and sections of country," says Professor W. A. Wright, "are
almost universally derived from the name of their first settlers or
earliest historic populations." [30]


_Of the Nephites, Like the Jews Being a Mononymous People._

Still another singular and fortunate circumstance for the claims of the
Book of Mormon with reference to names should be noted. "Unlike the
Romans," says Professor Wright, already quoted, "but like the Greeks,
the Hebrews were a mononymous people. That is, each person received but
a single name. [31] The Nephites, it must be remembered, were Hebrews,
and therefore would very likely follow the custom of their race with
reference to this practice of giving but one name to a person. This
they did; for throughout the Nephite part of the Book of Mormon, there
is not a single instance where a person receives more than one name.
In other words, the Nephites, like the whole Hebrew race, were a
mononymous people. So, too, the Jaredites, a more ancient branch of the
same race, are a mononymous people.

Now, as neither Joseph Smith nor his associates would likely be
acquainted with this singular custom of the Hebrew race, I take the
fact of agreement of Nephite practice with this Hebrew custom, as an
incidental evidence of some weight in favor of the claims of the Book
of Mormon. To appreciate the value of it, I will ask the reader to
think what importance would be given to an objection based upon the
violation of this custom by a branch of the Hebrew race. That is,
suppose the Book of Mormon had been full of double names, applied to
the same person, what then? Could it not be claimed with some force
that here would be the violation of a very universal custom of the
Hebrew people? I think such a claim, if the facts warranted it, would
be both forceful and consistent. Instead of the violation of the Hebrew
custom, however, there is a singular accordance with it; and the fact
of agreement, I suggest, is entitled to as much weight in favor of the
book as the supposed disagreement would have been against it.

This circumstance also sustains the claims of the Book of Mormon to
being an ancient record; for if it was of modern origin, having for its
authors Joseph Smith and his associates, it would not very likely have
followed so absolutely this ancient Hebrew custom, since Joseph Smith
and his associates lived in a time and among a people where it was
common at least, if not actually customary, to give to persons double
names, a custom that would likely have influenced them in any creation
of names which they would have attempted.

But very few Jaredite and Nephite proper names with their
interpretation, and but few original common names, with their
interpretation have found their way into the translation of the
Jaredite and Nephite records. Of the first class--proper names with
interpretations--I instance the Jaredite word "Ripliancum," [32] which
by interpretation means "large," or "to exceed all." It is employed in
connection with describing the arrival of the army of Coriantumr in
the region of the great lakes, between the present countries of Canada
and the United States. It is most probably a proper name carrying with
it the signification equivalent to the phrase we use in describing the
same waters, viz: "the Great Lakes," or, as the implied Book of Mormon
interpretation stands, bodies of water that exceed in size all others
of their kind.

Then there is the Jaredite common name "deseret," meaning honey bee.
 [33] In passing I call attention to the fact that the Hebrew proper
name, "Deborah" also means "bee," that is, honey bee; [34] and it is
quite likely that the proper name "Deborah" is derived from the same
root whence comes "Deseret." The only other common names from the
Jaredites are the words "cureloms" and "cumoms." [35] These are the
names of domestic animals said to have been especially useful to the
Jaredites, hence most likely used either for draft or pack animals, or
perhaps both.

Turning to the Nephite record we have the name of "Irreantum," [36]
meaning the sea, or "many waters." Also the word "Liahona," [37]
meaning "compass," or perhaps more properly, "director," since, unlike
the modern compass, it indicated a variant direction rather than a
permanent one; and was made useful to the person possessing it through
the principle of faith rather than the magnetic polar force; hence
it could only be explained by the term "compass" in that it was an
"indicator," or "director." The word "Gazelem" is also a Nephite word,
meaning "a stone," that is, a seer stone, since it is spoken of as
a means of ascertaining knowledge through it by revelation. [38] In
addition to these words we have also a number of names of Nephite coins
and the names of fractional values of coins, as follows:

The names of the gold coins, commencing with the one of lowest value,
are: a senine, a seon, a shum and a limnah.

A seon was twice the value of a senine; a shum was twice the value of a
seon; and a limnah was equal to the value of all the other gold coins.

The silver coins were, a senum, an amnor, an ezrom and an onti.

Their relative value is stated as follows: an amnor of silver was twice
the value of a senum; an ezrom four times the value of a senum; an onti
was equal in value to all the other silver coins.

The fractional values are represented as follows: A shiblom is half a
senum; a shiblum is one half a shiblom; a leah is one half of a shiblum.

We have no means of obtaining specifically the value of these coins in
modern terms, nor am I interested in that matter here. I only desire to
call attention to the fact that these are Nephite names brought over
into our language by the translation of the Nephite records, though
reference to the passage [39] where the tables are given will plainly
indicate to the interested enquirer that there is stated a system of
relative values in these coins that bears evidence of its being genuine.

Alluding to this matter of names in a general way I suggest that there
is nothing more difficult in literature than to originate new names.
As a matter of fact names do not suggest things, but things suggest
names. Men do not bring into existence names and then fasten them upon
things, but they see an object, they hear a sound, or become acquainted
with an idea, and the object, the sound or the idea suggests a name. So
that names, speaking generally, arise from things already existing and
are not formed arbitrarily. The names in the Book of Mormon could come
into existence in one of two ways only. Either Joseph Smith arbitrarily
created them, or else he found them in the Nephite record. Since
originating new names is so extremely difficult, the probability in
the case lies on the side of Joseph Smith finding them in the Nephite
record. If any one should doubt of the difficulty of originating new
names I would invite him to make the experiment. In this connection I
remember with what ease an old teacher of mine in English put down a
somewhat presumptuous class mate. The teacher had expatiated on the
excellence of the Proverbs of Solomon, when the aforesaid class mate
expressed his contempt of things so simple. "Proverbs," exclaimed he,
to those sitting near him, "why, it's easy enough to write proverbs."
The good Doctor who was our teacher happened to overhear the remark
and said to the speaker, "Suppose you write us a few." My class mate
tried: and the more he tried the farther from proverbs he got. He had
not learned that proverbs were the "pure literature of reason:" the
statement of "absolute truths without qualification;" "the sanctuary
of the intuitions of humanity." And so with this matter of originating
names. It may seem a simple thing, but those who entertain such an idea
let them give us a few new names. Now, the Book of Mormon has a number
of proper names that are not new. These are chiefly Bible names and are
found in Nephite writings because the Nephites brought with them to the
western hemisphere copies of so many of the sacred books of the Jews
as were in existence at the time of their departure from Judea, 600 B.
C., parts of which were multiplied by copying and helped form part of
the Nephite literature; hence they sometimes used Bible names. But the
Book of Mormon also gives us a long list of absolutely new names, both
of men and of places, though in many in stances, as already pointed
out, the names of cities and the districts or country surrounding them
took the name of some noted person in some way or other prominently
connected with the history of the place. I have already pointed out
that a marked distinction exists between Nephite names and Jaredite
names, so that we may see that the Book of Mormon gives us two lists of
new names, one Jaredite, the other Nephite, which fact, when coupled
with the well recognized difficulty of originating names, renders the
performance all the more remarkable. It not only demonstrates the
originality of the Book of Mormon, but must be admitted to be either a
striking demonstration of wonderful genius on the part of the Prophet
Joseph Smith, or else a very strong evidence in support of the claims
of the Book of Mormon. And since the list of new names is quite too
large to refer to the genius of one single writer for their origin, I
think the latter conclusion represents the truth in the case.


1. Vol. II., chapter viii.

2. Alma iv: 1-5.

3. Alma i: 23, 24.

4. Helaman iii: 32, 33.

5. Helaman iii: 32, 33.

6. Helaman xi: 21-24

7. Ether xiv: 33.

8. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, Hackett edition Vol. III., p. 2062.

9. In the first chapter of Ether there is given a list of names of
Jaredite kings, twenty-six in all. In the first thirteen names--half
of the number--representing the most ancient Jaredite times, there
are only four that could possibly be derivatives; these are Oriah,
Coriantumr, Riplakish, Morianton, while in the latter half of the list
of names there are at least six derivatives. Beginning with the most
ancient they are--Hearthom, Amnigaddah, Coriantumr, Shiblon, Ethem,

10. It is not until we reach the middle and later period of Nephite
times that we meet with such names as Amlici, Antiomno, Amalickiah,
Nephiah, Moronihah, Kishkuman, Pecumeni, Lachoneus, Giddianhi,
Gidgiddoni, Zemnarihah, Ammaron, Ammonihah, and many others that are
plainly derivative names.

11. While there can be no more than conjecture upon this point the
likelihood of the thing, I am inclined to believe, is all on the side
of his marriage and the perpetuation of his race. Coriantumr had
doubtless every reason to believe that he was the sole survivor of his
people, and he could have no greater anxiety than that his race should
be perpetuated. In support of this theory it may be urged that in the
Nephite history, about 41 B. C., we learn of a very strong and mighty
leader in war, bearing the name "Coriantumr," who was a descendant of
Zarahemla (Helaman i: 15: 32), the leader of the descendants of Mulek's
colony when discovered by Mosiah I, about 200 B. C. It was Mulek's
colony, it will be remembered, who found Coriantumr, the Jaredite,
and with whom he lived some nine months. May it not be reasonably
supposed that this noted man among the Nephites, bearing the name of
the old Jaredite chieftain was a descendant of his, since we find that
chieftain's name strangely appearing among the Nephites? And may it
not be urged that here we have one of those obscure instances in the
history of a great people unlikely to be provided for by conspirators
constructing a book to be imposed up the world as a revelation from God?

12. It is quite possible also that the word Shiblon among the Nephites
came from the Jaredites. Unfortunately the orthography of this name
is given in two ways in the translation of the Jaredite abridgment,
"Shiblom" and "Shiblon;" but if the Jaredite name is Shiblon, it may
be that the name among the Nephites was taken from the Jaredites as

13. Ether vii: 4-9.

14. Ether vii: 6, 16, 17; also xiv: 6-11.

15. Helaman v: 14.

16. Alma li: 30.

17. Helaman i: 22.

18. Helaman i: 23.

19. Alma l: 14.

20. Alma lxii: 32.

21. Alma lxii: 30.

22. Alma lxii: 30.

23. Alma lvi: 14.

24. Alma lvi: 14.

25. Rollin's Ancient History, Vol. I., pp. 266, 227.

26. Ibid.

27. Genesis xi: 9.

28. Osborn, Ancient Egypt and the light of Modern Discoveries, p. 205.

29. Plato (Jowett), Vol. II., p. 517.

30. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, Hackett Ed., Vol. III., p. 2060.

31. Ibid.

32. Ether xv: 8.

33. Ether ii: 3.

34. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, article "Names," Vol. III., p.

35. Ether ix: 19.

36. I. Nephi xvii: 5.

37. Alma xxxvii: 38-40. I. Nephi xvi: 10-30. I. Nephi xviii: 12-21. II.
Nephi v: 12.

38. Alma xxxvii: 23.

39. Alma xi.



In the Book of Mormon three forms of government are said to have
existed among the various peoples inhabiting the western world. These
are, first, a Monarchial form; second, a sort of Republic or rule of
Judges; third, an Ecclesiastical government, or rule of priests, ending
finally in the rule of military chieftains. The Book of Mormon giving
as it does, though only in an incidental way, a description of these
several forms of government, presents a crucial test of its claims to
being a translation of an ancient record. For if in describing any
one of these forms of government it should be out of harmony with
well known facts concerning ancient forms of government, or if it
ascribes to them qualities or powers out of harmony with the times
or circumstances under which they existed, then doubt is thrown upon
the claims of the book to being a translation of an ancient record.
To illustrate the proposition now laid down: It is well known that to
the ancients the only form of monarchy was what we call a "simple" or
"absolute" monarchy; that is, a form of government in which all powers
of government are centered in one person. Such a thing as a division of
the powers of government into co-ordinate branches, relegating several
functions to distinct persons or groups of persons, was unknown to
the ancients. The ideas prevailing in modern times which have brought
into existence our "mixed" or "constitutional monarchies" had not
as yet been discovered by the ancients; hence if such modern ideas
concerning monarchy should be found in the Book of Mormon governments,
involving the existence of cabinets, parliaments or distinct judiciary
departments it would at least be very prejudical to the claims of the
book to being an ancient record.

Again in respect of democratic forms of government: the only form
known to the ancient was "simple" democracy. The form of government
by which the people acted directly upon governmental affairs. The
principle of representation in democracies was not as yet discovered
in times contemporary with the Book of Mormon republic, therefore
if in the Nephite republic, or the "reign of the Judges," as that
form of government is sometimes called in the Book of Mormon, there
should be found the representative principle, which is really a modern
refinement in government, that fact too would be prejudicial to its
claims being an ancient record. Per contra, if these modern ideas
respecting monarchial and democratic forms of government are absent
from the kingdoms and republics described in the book, then it would
be at least presumptive evidence of the genuineness of its claims;
for if the Book of Mormon had been the product of a modern author, or
authors, there would very likely be found in it some of the modern
ideas of government, both in its monarchies and in its republics, and
especially would this be probable if its authors were illiterate men
and not acquainted with these facts concerning government among ancient
peoples. Under those circumstances the ancient and modern forms would
inevitably be confounded because modern illiterate authors would not
possess sufficient discretion to keep them separated.


I am aware that the Book of Mormon account of the Jaredite monarchy
is so very limited that we can form but little idea as to its nature;
but the little there is said of it is strictly in harmony with the
ancient forms of monarchy. That is, the kings were absolute, the source
of all law and the center of all political power. They were inducted
into their office by formal anointing, according to ancient custom.
 [1] They are sometimes associated with them on the throne the son who
had been selected to succeed in the kingly authority, which is also in
accordance with ancient custom. [2]

Respecting the nature of the Nephite kingdom also but little can be
learned from the Book of Mormon because matters concerning government
are only mentioned in an incidental way, but from what little is said
we are justified in forming the same conclusions regarding it as in
regard to the Jaredite Monarchy. That is, it was "simple" or "absolute"
monarchy. The remarks of Mosiah II in relation to the power of a king
for good or evil leads to the conclusion that the power of a Nephite
king was most absolute; and that with the Nephite monarch as with the
Jaredite, the king was the source of all laws and the center of all
political authority. The remarks referred to are as follows:

    And behold, now I say unto you, ye cannot dethrone an iniquitous
    king, save it be through much contention, and the shedding of much
    blood. For behold, he has his friends in iniquity, and he keepeth
    his guards about him; and he teareth up the laws of those who have
    reigned in righteousness before him; and he trampleth under his
    feet the commandments of God; and he enacteth laws, and sendeth
    them forth among his people; yea, laws after the manner of his
    own wickedness; and whosoever does not obey his laws, he causeth
    to be destroyed; and whosoever doth rebel against him, he will
    send his armies against them to war, and if he can he will destroy
    them; and thus an unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all
    righteousness. [3]

This certainly is a description of arbitrary powers vested in the
king. And what is true of the Nephite monarchy is equally true of the
Lamanite kingdoms--judging from those rare and brief glimpses one
gets of Lamanite governments in the Book of Mormon. Among all three
peoples--Jaredites, Nephites, Lamanites--wherever kingly government
is described it is the same--it is "simple," "absolute," "ancient"
monarchy. [4] There is no indication anywhere of the existence of
cabinets or parliaments; or of the division of political authority into
executive, legislative or judicial co-ordinate branches. Nor is there
any indication that there was ever an attempt to blend the various
primary forms of government--monarchy, aristocracy, democracy--into
a mixed government, a government embracing elements from all three
of these recognized primary forms. Such mixed governments are modern
creations; refinements in the science of government unattempted by
the ancients. The ancients, in fact, held them to be impossible, mere
visionary whims, solecisms. Even a man of the excellent understanding
of Tacitus declared that if such a government were formed it could
never be lasting or secure.

Reign of the Judges--Republic.

It is however in the matter of the Nephite "reign of the Judges" or the
"Nephite Republic" that an illiterate, modern writer would most likely
have betrayed himself. Especially an American writer strongly imbued
with the excellence, to say nothing of the sanctity, of the American
form of government.

That Joseph Smith, as also his early and later associates, were imbued
with such opinions concerning the American system of government is
notorious. Joseph Smith declared the constitution of the United States
to have resulted from the inspiration of God: "And again I say unto
you, those who have been scattered by their enemies, it is my will
that they should continue to importune for redress, and redemption, by
the hands of those who are placed as rulers, and are in authority over
you, according to the laws and constitution of the people which I have
suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and
protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles, that
every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity,
according to the moral agency which I have given unto them, that every
man be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. Therefore,
it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another. And
for this purpose have I established the constitution of this land, by
the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and
redeemed the land by the shedding of blood." [5]

On another occasion the Prophet said: "Hence we say, that the
constitution of the United States is a glorious standard; it is founded
in the wisdom of God. It is a heavenly banner; it is to all those who
are privileged with the sweets of its liberty, like the cooling shades
and refreshing waters of a great rock in a thirsty and weary land. It
is like a great tree under whose branches men from every clime can be
shielded from the burning rays of [oppression's] sun." [6]

Still more especially would an illiterate modern writer be likely to
betray himself if the American system of government was practically
the only one of which he had any definite knowledge. If then his
description of a "reign of judges," based upon democratic principles,
among an ancient people, escape not only some but all modern
refinements of democratic government--some of which were unknown until
employed in the establishment of the republic of the United States
 [7]--then indeed are we well within the realm of the marvelous. And
this we may claim for the Book of Mormon description of the "reign of
the judges," viz. that while it outlines a government based upon the
central principle of democracy--government by the people [8]--yet there
is nothing modern in that republic. The principle of representation
no where appears; a division of the political power into co-ordinate
and independent departments no where appears; there is no indication
of a federation even, much less any of those modern refinements which
distinguish modern federated republics from more ancient federated

Of course democratic government existed from very ancient times
and there have also been from of old confederated republics, but
the government of the United States rests upon some principles
that are recognized as entirely modern. The principal differences
between the modern republics and the ancient are these: first, the
modern republics recognize the principle of representation: that is,
masses of the people delegate authority to act for them to selected
representatives; second, the powers of government are lodged in three
distinct co-ordinate departments, the law making, the law executing,
and the law determining departments; third, the federal government
has the same division of political power as the respective states,
viz., legislative, executive and judicial; and also has conferred upon
it power, within the limits prescribed by the constitution, to act
directly through its own instrumentalities upon the citizens of the
respective states. The last item the French philosopher De Tocqueville,
in speaking of the republic of the United States, declared to be a
wholly novel theory which he characterizes as a great discovery in
modern political science. "In all the confederations which precede
the American constitution of 1789," he says, "the allied states,
for a common object, agree to obey the injunctions of a federal
government; but they [the respective states] reserve to themselves
the right of ordaining and enforcing the execution of the laws of the
union. The American states which combined in 1789, agreed that the
federal government should not only dictate but should execute its own
enactments. In both cases the right is the same but the exercise of the
right is different; and this difference produced the most momentous
consequences. The new word which ought to express this novel thing does
not yet exist." (De Tocqueville, U. S. Constitution, Vol. I.)

Ecclesiastical Government.

The government which obtained in the era following the advent of
Messiah in the western world was also in harmony with the conditions
prevailing in those days. That is, the ecclesiastical government
supplied by the Church founded by Messiah appears to have superseded
all other form of government through the two hundred years which
succeeded that event; nor, indeed, up to the close of the Book of
Mormon period, 420 A. D., except here and there a reference made
to "kings" among that division of the people who styled themselves
Lamanites; but I take it that even these "kings" among the Lamanites
more nearly resembled military chieftains than monarchs at the head
of settled governments. In the division of the people called Nephites
there is no reference either to a reign of judges or of kings or other
form of government than this Church or Ecclesiastical government, so
that what I have previously said upon this subject [9] will be found
correct, viz., the people after the establishment of the Church of
Christ among them found its institutions and authority sufficient, as
well in secular as in spiritual affairs. That such a government as
this should take the place of governments formerly existing, I repeat,
was in harmony with conditions that obtained after the advent of
Messiah. I have already called attention to the fact that government
becomes necessary because of the vices and injustice of men. That
its chief function is to restrain men from injuring one another and
thus give security to society. When all the people are righteous
government becomes well nigh unnecessary, or operates at least in a
very limited sphere, and the form of government becomes a matter of
more or less indifference. Now it will be remembered that in the awful
judgments of God which had swept over the western world at Messiah's
crucifixion the more ungodly part of the people were destroyed, and
those who survived were afterwards thoroughly converted to the gospel
of Jesus Christ by his advent and the ministry of his servants, so
that there was inaugurated an era of peace and perfect righteousness.
For two centuries at least there was a veritable golden age in the
American continents, during which time the simple laws of righteousness
promulgated by the gospel were all sufficient as a rule of conduct, and
men practically forgot the reign of kings and the reign of judges. When
wickedness once more began to stalk through the land it may be that the
hitherto prevailing ecclesiastical governments gave way to the rule
of military chieftains, both among the Nephites and Lamanites, though
among the later such chieftains were sometimes called "kings."

That the monarchial and republican forms of government described in
the Book of Mormon should be in harmony with the principles of those
ancient political systems, and that the kind of government which
obtained after the advent of Messiah among the Nephites should be in
such perfect harmony with the conditions that obtained in that period,
is internal evidence of marked significance in support of the claims
of the Book of Mormon. To see it in its full strength one should ask
himself what would be the state of the case if the descriptions of
monarchial and democratic government were not in harmony with the
restricted ideas of ancient governments, but were full of modern ideas
and refinements of government; and if the facts existing after the
advent of Messiah and the introduction of the Nephite golden age were
utterly at variance with the kind of government that we are ready to
believe then obtained. It should be remembered that if inconsistencies
in the Book of Mormon forms of government would be so damaging against
its claims to being an ancient record, then consistency in its forms of
government should be allowed equal weight in support of its claims to
being an ancient record.

The Events to which Importance is Given in the Book of Mormon are in
Harmony with the Character of the Writers.

In considering this subject we must bear in mind the purposes for which
the Book of Mormon was written. The purposes are set forth in detail in
chapter III.

Here it will be sufficient to say that the main purpose of the Book of
Mormon is to be a witness for Jesus, the Christ; for the truth of the
Gospel as the power of God unto salvation.

Notwithstanding these purposes are adhered to throughout the work it
is very noticeable, and indeed one cause of complaint against the
book, that it gives great prominence, at least in the parts made up
of Mormon and Moroni's abridgments, to wars; to minute descriptions
of battles, the construction of fortifications, and the affairs of
war in general. This doubtless arises from the fact that Mormon and
Moroni were both military chieftains, and notwithstanding their general
purpose was to make prominent the religious events which happened
among the Nephites and Jaredites, and the hand-dealings of God with
those peoples, yet when these writers came to give an account of wars,
it is but to be expected, by the very nature of things, that they
could not refrain from recording those events which would have such
a powerful attraction for them. Involuntarily they were drawn into a
description of those events, and unconsciously gave them prominence in
their narratives. So I say the events to which importance is given in
the Book of Mormon are in harmony with the character of the writers,
a fact which is still further emphasized by the nature of the first
part of the volume. We have seen that 149 of the 157 pages constituting
that first part is written by the first Nephi and his brother Jacob,
prophets and priests of God. In their writings wars are mentioned only
in the most incidental way, but there is an abundance of religious
teaching, and prominence is given to visions, dreams and revelations,
and that because those writers were, in the main, prophets and priests
of God. It should also be noted, of course, that the time in which
these earlier writers lived was not so much a period of warfare as
subsequent centuries among the Nephites. It is to be observed, then,
in conclusion upon this point, that the very prominence given to wars
and battle-movements in Mormon's and Moroni's part of the volume is
but in keeping with the nature of things--an additional evidence of
consistency in the work--the events to which importance is given are in
harmony with the character of the writers.

_Complexity in the Structure of the Book of Mormon in Harmony with
the Theory of its Origin._

I hesitated some time before adopting the above as a heading for this
division of the subject, because I was aware, and am still aware of the
fact that it scarcely presents the thought I would have considered;
and I know how easily, by a slight variation, it could be made subject
to the smart retort that the complexity of the structure of the Book
of Mormon is in harmony with the theory of its merely human origin
since it is simplicity, not complexity, which is the sign manual of
things divine. Still, for all that, I have concluded to make use of
this faulty title, for want of a better, confident that when my whole
thought under it is developed it will result in producing evidence for
the truth of the claims of the book.

That the structure of the Book of Mormon is complex all who read it
know. The first part of it is made up of the translation of unabridged
records, the small plates of Nephi. The second part is made up of the
translation of abridged books (Mormon's abridgment), Mormon, however,
retaining for the several parts of his abridgment the title of the
respective books he abridged.

I have already pointed out the fact [10] that Mormon's condensed
narrative from the original Nephite records makes up the body of his
work; with occasional direct quotations from the original records, and
the whole more or less confused by his running comments, unseparated
from the body of his work save by the sense of the text. All this is
complex enough surely, but the end is not yet; for within the old
Nephite records Mormon had at hand while doing the work of abridgment,
there were still other books. That is, books within books; as, for
instance, the Book of Zeniff within the Book of Mosiah, which see.
 [11] Also the account of the church founded by the first Alma,
likewise within the book of Mosiah. Also the account of the missionary
expedition to the Lamanites by the young Nephite princes, sons of
King Mosiah II., within the book of Alma, which see. [12] Mormon,
coming to these books within books, followed that order also in his
abridgment; so that as in the original Nephite records, we have books
within books, so within Mormon's abridgment we have abridged records
within abridged records. Then, as if to cap the climax of complexity
in structure, Mormon writes a book of his own to which he gives his
own name. That is, calls it the Book of Mormon; the last two chapters
of which, however, are written by Moroni. Then follows what may be
called the third part of the Book of Mormon--Moroni's abridgment of the
twenty-four plates of Ether, which gives us so much of the history as
we have of the Jaredites. By this arrangement the history of the first
people to occupy the western hemisphere, (after the flood), comes last
in the Book of Mormon; and Moroni's abridgment of the Jaredite record
has much of the complexity of his father's abridgment of the Nephite

Now, with all this before the mind of the reader--whether he regards
Joseph Smith, Solomon Spaulding, or Sidney Rigdon as the author of the
Book of Mormon--I submit to him the question: Would either ingenuity or
stupidity in a modern author suggest such complexity in the structure
of a book as this? Can a parallel case be pointed to in the modern
making of books?

If the Book of Mormon were modern in structure and its author or
authors had the conception that this western world was peopled by a
colony coming from the Euphrates valley, in very ancient times, and
subsequently by two other colonies from Judea, one leaving 600 B.
C. and the other shortly afterwards, in giving the history of those
people, would not the modern author have begun with the most ancient
colony and treated the history of the respective peoples in the order
of their occupancy of the western continents? Then, again: If the Book
of Mormon is mere fiction, the idle coinage of an inventive, modern
author, why three migrations?

If the object of the modern author was merely to convey an idea how
a civilized race in ancient times occupied the western world, why
would not the first migration--the Jaredite--have answered all his
purposes? Or why not take the second migration--the Nephite--for the
accomplishment of such a purpose? Why complicate it by bringing in the
migration of Mulek's colony, when the simple treatment of developing
the Nephite colony into national proportions would have been sufficient
for the purpose of a work of fiction? One other question I would submit
relative to the Jaredite record and the strange place it occupies in
the Book of Mormon. The plates of Ether were found by an expedition
sent out from Zeniff's colony about 123 B. C., and were translated
shortly afterwards by Mosiah II., who was a seer; that is, he was able
to use Urim and Thummim in the translation of strange languages. Now,
why did not Mormon include an abridgment of Mosiah's translation of
the plates of Ether in his abridgment of Nephite records, allowing it
to stand in his collection of plates as his abridgment of the Book of
Zeniff stands within his abridgment of the Book of Mosiah, instead
of passing the matter by and leaving it for his son Moroni to make a
translation direct from the Book of Ether, thus throwing the history
of the first inhabitants of the western world, after the flood, to the
very last part of the record? Candidly, does the complex structure of
the Book of Mormon appeal to one as at all modern in its arrangement?
Are modern books so constructed? And yet, notwithstanding all the
complexity in the structure of the book, each part is so in harmony
with every other part, and with the whole, that really, after all, it
is a very simple book, and one readily understood. It is clear that the
very peculiar circumstances under which the Book of Mormon was compiled
by the original Nephite writers, and that neither the ingenuity nor
the stupidity of Joseph Smith, nor of any other modern writer, is
responsible for this peculiar structure of the book. And, moreover,
since the book in its details retains harmonious consistency with
the plan of its structure, must not such a fact be conceded to be an
incidental evidence in favor of its claims?


1. Ether vi: 27. Ibid. ix: 15-22. Ibid. x: 10 et. seq.

2. Ether ix: 14, 15, 21, 22. Ibid. x: 13.

3. Mosiah xxix: 21-23. See also remarks, chapters x, and xiii.

4. Perhaps it may be thought that an exception should be made in the
matter of Lamanite kingdoms, of which I have spoken (chapter xiii) as
constituting at one period of Lamanite history, a sort of confederacy
of kingdoms; but this does not affect the statement of the text which
is dealing with the form of government. I believe myself justified in
saying that whether reference is made to the petty Lamanite kingdoms
or the central kingdom to which they were tributary, the principle
in government will be found the same--the king is the source of all
political power, the monarchy is "simple," the kingly power absolute.

5. Doc. & Cov., Sec. ci: 76-80.

6. Letters of Joseph Smith, from Liberty Prison, under date of March
25, 1839--to the Church of the Latter-day Saints. History of the
Church, Vol. III., p. 304.

7. See De Tocqueville's Constitution of the U. S., Vol. I.

8. See Chapter xiii.

9. Ante pp. 216-7.

10. See Ante Chapter xxxvii.

11. Book of Mosiah, p. 181 (current edition).

12. Book of Mormon, p 283 (current edition).



How far originality may be insisted upon as a necessary element in a
book avowedly containing a revelation from God is an open question;
just as how far originality in a prophet may be insisted upon is.
In both cases, however, it cannot be doubted but that originality
would be regarded as evidence of considerable weight in favor of the
divinity of the message of either prophet or book. Somehow men look for
originality in any thing that purports to be a revelation from God,
come how it will. They look for a word "from the inner fact of things"
in a revelation. A new word that shall add somewhat to the sum of known
things, and spoken in a way to attract anew the attention of men. And
yet it must not be forgotten that "every scribe which is instructed
unto the kingdom of heaven * * * bringeth forth out of his treasure
things new and old" [1]--the old, mark you, as well as the new--and one
of olden time doubted even if there really was any new thing under the
sun. "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that
which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing
under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, see, this is
new? It hath been already of old time, which was before us." [2]

From all which I conclude that while in a way originality may be
regarded as affording some evidence in favor of the claims of a prophet
and his message, or of a book and its revelation, still originality is
not an indispensable quality in either prophet or book. Contemporary
prophets, or prophets living in succession, may come burdened with the
same word of the Lord, with the same divine message; but the one who
speaks secondly or thirdly, and hence with all claim to originality
gone, is none the less God's messenger; and the word he speaks may not
with safety be rejected for that it lacks the quality of originality.
So, too, with books. It would be a senseless manner of handling the
scriptures to reject the books called first and second Chronicles
because they chiefly duplicate the matter of the books called first
and second Kings, and have little originality to commend them to our
acceptance. So with the books of the New Testament. Accepting for our
purpose here the order in which they stand in the commonly received
versions of the New Testament, as the order in which the books were
written, shall the book of Mark be rejected because in the main it
deals with the same matter that engages the attention of Matthew,
and there is but little on the score of its originality of matter to
commend it as an inspired book? The same question could be asked in
relation to the book of Luke. The truth is that God in books as in
prophets sometimes requires more than one for a witness to his message,
and hence repeats the revelation in a number of inspired books, in
which case the books merely repeating the revelation are as truly
inspired, as truly scripture as the one in which the message first
appeared, although it could be said that the quality of originality is
wholly wanting.

Since the Book of Mormon feigns the introduction of no new religion,
but gives merely an account of the introduction of the Christian
religion in the western hemisphere, by inspired teachers, both before
and after the coming of Messiah, and by the personal ministry of
Messiah after his resurrection; and as the Christian religion is always
the same, in all times and in all lands, it must have been the same
when introduced into America as when taught in Judea--where is room
for originality? Is not originality by the very nature of the claims
of the Book of Mormon excluded? The reader, I believe, will recognize
the force of the question; and I take occasion here to remark that
the point in the question exhibits the weakness of those objections
that are sometimes urged against the Book of Mormon on the score of
sameness of matter in it and the New Testament; and also it exhibits
how senseless is the clamor for the existence of some new moral or
religious truth [3] in the Book of Mormon, not to be found in the Old
or New Testaments.

Since, then, the Book of Mormon, so far as it treats of religion,
treats of the Christian religion, it is comparison not contrast that
should be made; sameness, not difference that should be looked for;
identity of moral and religious truths, not differences; accordance
with old truths, rather than the existence of new ones. The Christian
religion may not be contrasted with itself; and as the fullness of the
gospel was revealed in the proclamation of it in Judea, it would be
sufficient if a dispensation of the same gospel proclaimed in America
is in strict accordance with that taught in Judea. In fact this is
all that the nature of the case strictly requires. Still, after the
reasonableness of all this is established, there may be claimed for the
Book of Mormon an originality in the fact of the existence of new and
important Christian truths in its pages; as, also an originality of
emphasis placed on certain other Christian truths.

This much that a proper estimate may be formed of the value of
originality as an evidence of the divine authenticity or inspiration of
a book; neither giving an exaggerated value to it on the one hand, nor
accounting it of little or no importance on the other.


_Originality of Structure._

In enumerating the several particulars in which the Book of Mormon
manifests originality, I would name its peculiar structure--so at
variance with all modern ideas of book making--pointed out in the
treatment of the last subdivision of chapter xxxviii, and ask the
reader to consider that treatise brought over into this subdivision,
and the peculiar structure of the Book of Mormon made one, and the
first, of the evidences of its originality.


_Originality in Names._

So also as to names; so far as they are original, I would have that
fact considered as another, the second, evidence of the originality
of the Book of Mormon; and so much of that treatise as deals with the
originality of the names, (see chapter xxxvii) considered as brought
over into this subdivision.


_In the Manner of its Coming Forth._

In the manner of its coming forth no less than in its structure and
its names, the Book of Mormon is original. It must be remembered that
at the time of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon such a thing
as a new revelation from God was utterly unlooked for. Indeed it was
the consensus of Christian opinion and teaching that the time of
revelation had passed; that the days of miracles were over; that God
in the Christian dispensation to mankind (the dispensation in which
Messiah ministered in person) spoke the final word; that no more divine
communication would be given. Speculating upon this very subject in
connection with the desirability for knowledge respecting the ancient
inhabitants of America, Ethan Smith, in his "View of the Hebrews; or
the Tribes of Israel in America," says, most emphatically:

    We are to expect no new revelation from heaven, and the days of
    miracles are thought to be past. We probably must look for just
    such evidence to exhibit to the world that people so long lost [as
    the ten Tribes of Israel], as is in fact exhibited by the natives
    of America. [4]

It is well to remember that this was said some years before the
Book of Mormon was published, and I repeat that it represents the
generally accepted Christian idea concerning revelation and miracles.
Furthermore, it is notorious that the prime objection urged against
the Book of Mormon was the fact that it claimed to be a new revelation
from God; and the arguments found in the discourses and writings of
the early Elders of the Church clearly prove that the chief contention
over the Book of Mormon in those early days was on this point. [5] It
follows, therefore, that Joseph Smith's account of the manner in which
the Book of Mormon was brought forth and translated was a very original
one; for it involved a revelation from God to make known its existence,
and what men call a miracle to secure its translation. Here, then, was
not only originality, but a bold contradiction of what was supposed to
be the most completely settled doctrine of modern Christendom, _viz_.
that the age of revelations and miracles had forever passed away. It
is scarcely probable that imposters would move along such lines as
these. The proclamation of a new revelation making known the existence
of a new volume of scripture was the most remarkable innovation upon
Christian opinion that the world had ever witnessed. Orthodoxy stood
aghast at the presumption as they called it; and seemed for a time to
forget all other points of controversy in order to concentrate their
attack upon this innovation of their most cherished idea. They thought
the very claim that the Book of Mormon involved a new revelation from
God was sufficient to justify its rejection. Yet never was opposition
so completely demolished in controversy as this sectarian argument
against new and continual revelation. So completely was it overthrown
that we to-day scarcely ever hear it mentioned. With this, however, I
have nothing further to do. My only point at present is that there was
a bold originality in Joseph Smith's account of the coming forth and
translation of the Book of Mormon, which, in addition to contravening
the accepted Christian opinion of the times on the subject of
revelation and miracles, carried with it much weight in support of the
claims made for this American volume of scripture; for surely imposters
seeking to foist a book upon the world either for obtaining fame or
money would never be found moving along lines so diametrically opposite
to accepted opinions.


_Its Accounting for the Peopling of America._

In its account of peopling America no less than in its structure and
the manner in which its existence was made known and its translation
accomplished, the Book of Mormon is original. All the books on
American antiquities that could possibly have been accessible to
Joseph Smith and his associates favored the theory of migrations from
northeastern Asia by way of Behring Straits where the Asiatic and
American continents approach each other. See Josiah Priest's American
Antiquities, preface. Ethan Smith, referring to the authorities that he
was acquainted with on this subject, says:

    All seem to agree that the Indians came from the northwest, and
    overspread the continent to the south. * * * * * I forbear to
    offer any further remarks upon these testimonies incidentally
    afforded by this most celebrated author, [meaning Humboldt]. Let
    them be duly weighed by the judicious reader; and he surely cannot
    doubt but that the natives of America came from the north over
    Behring's Straits; and descended from a people of as great mental
    cultivation, as were the ancient family of Israel. [6]

Not only were such the prevailing views at the time Ethan Smith wrote,
1825, but even to this day the same general opinion prevails among
authorities; [7] that is, that America was peopled from Asia by way
of Behring Straits. The migrations of the Book of Mormon, however,
contravene this quite generally accepted theory. While it is supposed
that the Jaredites passed out of the Euphrates valley and wandered
several years eastwardly through Asia, they crossed the Pacific and
landed in the south part of the north continent of America and settled
in a district of country they afterwards called Moron, near what was
afterwards the Nephite province called Desolation, which was in the
region of country known to us as the Central American States. [8]
The Nephite colony, as we have seen [9], landed on the west coast of
South America about thirty degrees south latitude; and Mulek's colony
is supposed to have landed somewhere in the south part of the North
American continent. These Book of Mormon accounts of migrations to
the American continents constitute the widest possible departure from
usually accepted theories upon the subject.


_The Nativity of Ancient American Peoples._

The Book of Mormon is original with reference to the facts it presents
respecting the nativity of its peoples. On this point, more is
sometimes claimed by believers in the Book of Mormon than is warranted
by the facts in the case. For example, it is sometimes stated that the
Israelitish origin of the native Americans was first asserted by the
Book of Mormon. That is not true. Long before the advent of the Book
of Mormon James Adair, whose work was published in 1775, advanced the
theory that the native American Indians were the Lost Ten Tribes of
Israel, and argued for the truth of his theory at great length. [10]
Ethan Smith, in his work we have several times quoted, advances the
theory that the native Indians were the "Ten Lost Tribes of Israel,"
the very title of his book--"View of the Hebrews; or the Tribes of
Israel in America"--is the evidence of his holding that theory.

It is therefore a mistake to say that the idea of Israelitish descent
of the native American Indians originated with the Book of Mormon.
Indeed the theory that the native Americans were the Ten Lost Tribes
of Israel found many advocates both in Europe and the United States,
especially, I may say, in the New England states, before 1830. Wherein
the Book of Mormon is original in respect of this matter is that while
declaring the Israelitish descent of the ancient people of America,
it directly contravenes the idea that the native Americans, are the
Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, by incidentally declaring those tribes to
be in another part of the world, and Jesus announcing to the Nephites
his intention to appear unto them, and administer among them. [11] Of
course reference to Israelitish descent is here made to the two last
migrations only, that is, to the colony of Lehi, and the colony of
Mulek. The colony of Jared were doubtless of the same race, but of
earlier ancestors, among whom the patriarch Shem. The Book of Mormon
refers to Lehi's colony as made up of descendants of Manasseh [Lehi]
and Ephraim [Ishmael] [12] while the colony of Mulek were Jews.

From this it appears that the Book of Mormon is as boldly original
in declaring the nativity of these colonies that peopled America
with teeming millions of their descendants, as it is in its account
of the course of their migrations or the manner in which the Book of
Mormon came forth. For, in limiting the nativity of these colonies to
the descendants of Joseph and of Judah, it as radically contravenes
existing opinions upon the subject as it does in respect of the manner
in which the book came forth, and the course of migration.


_Accounting for the Existence of Christian Ideas in America._

The Book of Mormon is original in the matter of accounting for the
existence of Christian ideas and doctrines among the native Americans.
I would have this statement so understood as to include all Bible
ideas, since right conceptions of Christianity in its fullness includes
the Old Testament and the dispensation of God to the children of men
described therein as part of the Christian heritage, as well as the
specific Christian dispensation which is described in the New Testament.

The manner in which the Book of Mormon accounts for Christian ideas
and doctrines among native Americans is, first, by detailing the facts
of direct revelation of Christian truths to the ancient inhabitants
of America, as, for instance, in the case of the Prophet Moriancumer
among the Jaredites, where that great prophet is represented as being
permitted to stand in the revealed presence of the preexisting spirit
of Jesus Christ, and to hear the proclamation that in him should all
mankind have life and that eternally; and that as he appeared unto
that prophet in the spirit, so would he appear unto his people in the
flesh; and that those who would believe on his name should become
his sons and daughters. [13] Also the revelation of Christian truths
vouchsafed to the first Nephi; who, in vision, some hundreds of years
before the advent of Christ, was permitted to foresee the birth of
the Redeemer, the labors of his forerunner, John the Baptist, who
prepared the way before him, and much of the Judean ministry of Christ,
including his crucifixion, his resurrection, and the establishment
of his ministry through twelve Apostles; so also his advent and
ministry among the inhabitants of the western world, [14] ending in
the establishment of the Christian sacraments, and of the Christian
Church, as the sacred depository of Christian truths. Secondly, the
Book of Mormon accounts for the existence of Christian ideas and
doctrines among native American races by declaring the Nephites to be
in possession of the Hebrew scriptures extant among that people from
the beginning up to 600 B. C., including the five books of Moses, some
of the writings of Isaiah and Jeremiah. [15] And also ascribing to
the Jaredites the knowledge of most ancient events through scriptures
in their possession, dealing with events from the Tower of Babel back
to the very days of Adam. [16] It is, then, by most direct means of
the revelations of God to the ancient inhabitants of America and the
personal ministration of Jesus Christ among them and the knowledge
imparted by these several volumes of very ancient scripture that the
Book of Mormon accounts for the existence of Christian ideas and
Christian truths among the native Americans.

There is nothing like this in the theories of men to account for the
existence of these truths in America. In the first place let the
reader be assured that it is quite generally conceded by the very best
authorities that ideas closely analogous to Christian truths are found
in the traditions of the native Americans. "Most ancient and modern
authors," says De Roo, "agree in saying that the Christian religion
has been taught on our [the American] continent at an epoch not so
very much anterior to the Columbian discovery. Bastian establishes the
latter opinion by the numerous analogies he points out between the
religious belief and practices of the Christians and those of American
aborigines. Von Humboldt admits the parity to be so striking as to
have given the Spanish missionaries a fine opportunity to deceive the
natives by making them believe that their own was none other than the
Christian religion. 'Not a single American missionary who has, until
this day, left any writing has forgotten to notice the evident vestiges
of Christianity which has in former time penetrated even among the most
savage tribes,' says Dr. de Mier, commenting on Sahagun's History.
Quite a number of ancient writers, such as Garcilasso de la Vega,
Solorzano, Acosta, and others are equally explicit in asserting that
several Christian tenets and practices were found among our aborigines;
but they deny their introduction by Christian teachers, giving, strange
to say, to the devil the honor of spreading the light of Christianity,
in spite of his hatred of it." [17] Later he says:

    No modern student of American antiquity fails to notice the close
    and striking resemblances between several leading particulars
    of Christian faith, morals, and ceremonies and those of ancient
    American religions. Sahagun, who wrote in Mexico about the middle
    of the sixteenth century, and took such great pains to be correctly
    informed in regard to all religious rites of our aborigines, states
    already that all the Spanish missionaries who wrote in America
    before him had pointed out the numerous vestiges of Christianity to
    be found even among the savage Indian tribes. [18]

Devil propaganda of Christianity was quite a favorite theory with many
of the early Spanish writers, while others advanced the theory that
Christian apostles had evangelized the western hemisphere. Among the
latter was the Archbishop of San Domingo, Davilla Padilli, a royal
chronicler who wrote a book to prove that Christian apostles had
formerly preached in the West Indies. So also Torquemada holds the same
opinion, although he admits of the possibility of the devil teaching
Christianity. More modern writers seek to account for the existence of
these Christian analogies in other ways. Prescott for instance, in his
Conquest of Peru, says:

    In the distribution of bread and wine at this high festival, [the
    feast of Raymi] the orthodox Spaniards who first came into the
    country saw a striking resemblance to the Christian communion;
    as in the practice of confession and penance, which, in a most
    irregular form indeed, seems to have been used by the Peruvians,
    they discerned a coincidence with another of the sacraments of the
    Church. The good fathers were fond of tracing such coincidences,
    which they considered as the contrivance of Satan, who thus
    endeavored to delude his victims by counterfeiting the blessed
    rites of Christianity. Others, in a different vein, imagined that
    they saw in such analogies the evidence that some of the primitive
    teachers of the gospel, perhaps an apostle himself, had paid a
    visit to these distant regions and scattered over them the seeds of
    religious truth. But it seems hardly necessary to invoke the Prince
    of Darkness, or the intervention of the blessed saints to account
    for coincidences which have existed in countries far removed from
    the light of Christianity, and in ages, indeed, when its light had
    not yet risen on the world. It is much more reasonable to refer
    such casual points of resemblance to the general constitution of
    man and the necessities of his moral nature. [19]

Of which I think De Roo very justly remarks: "The Christian mysteries
admitted by the ancient Peruvians and Mexicans could hardly find
their origin in man's constitution; nor are religious practices, like
baptism, fasting, celibacy, and a cloistered life, to be considered
as necessities of man's moral, yet corrupt nature. More reasonable and
better historical causes should be found to account for the presence of
Christian faith and Christian rites in ancient America." [20]

H. H. Bancroft also concedes the existence of rites among native
Americans analogous to those existing among Jews and Christians, but
regards them as mere coincidences. He says:

    Many rites and ceremonies were found to exist among the civilized
    nations of America that were very similar to certain others
    observed by the Jews and Christians in the old world. The
    innumerable speculators on the origin of the aboriginal inhabitants
    of the new world, or at least on the origin of their civilization,
    have not neglected to bring forward these coincidences--there is
    no good reason to suppose them anything else--in support of their
    various theories. [21]

On which De Roo remarks: "Coincidences, so many, so striking, in faith,
in morals, and liturgy! Coincidences, indeed, little short of wonders!"

Nadaillac also would refer these "coincidences" to natural causes. He
says "No dissemination of merely Christian ideas, since the conquest
[by the Spaniards] is sufficient to account for these myths [having
in mind the traditions of the creation, flood, migrations, Christian
analogies, etc.], which appear to have their root in the natural
tendencies of the human mind in its evolution from a savage state." [22]

And so in these various ways men would account for the existence of
Christian ideas and doctrines; but it was reserved for Joseph Smith,
the Prophet of the dispensation of the fullness of times, through the
Book of Mormon, to announce the boldly original idea that knowledge
of Christian truths and doctrines had their origin among native
American peoples in direct revelation to them from God; in the personal
ministration of the Lord Jesus Christ, after his resurrection from
the dead; and from being in possession of ancient scriptures which
to the Nephites, no less than to the Jews, made known God's plan of
redemption for mankind through the personal suffering and resurrection
of his Son Jesus Christ. I hold that the very originality and boldness
of these assertions respecting the direct means by which the people of
America in ancient times received their knowledge of Christian truths,
and which so far transcend the timid and tentative speculations of
men, even of the most intelligent and courageous, have about them an
atmosphere of truth that is most convincing; moreover, I cannot help
but believe that originality in respect of such things as are here set
down; structure, names, the manner of coming forth, in its account of
peopling America, the nativity of American people, and lastly this
accounting for the existence of Christian ideas among native American
races, is of a vastly greater importance than originality in mere
phraseology or style of composition.


1. Matt. xiii: 52.

2. Ecclesiastes i: 9, 10.

3. For this clamor see a brief discussion on the Book of Mormon
between the writer and an "Unknown" writer in "The Salt Lake Tribune,"
impressions of Nov. 22, 29; and December 6, 13, 1903. See also "The
Golden Bible" (Lamb), Edition of 1887, p. 207-213. Also the views of
the Rev. Dr. Wm. M. Paden, of the First Presbyterian Church; Salt Lake
City, quoted by the writer in a discourse on "The Fifth Gospel"--Third
Nephi--"Defense of the Faith and the Saints," Vol. I, pp. 373-399.

4. View of the Hebrews, 2nd Edition, (1825) pp. 168, 169.

5. See the works of Orson and Parley P. Pratt; John Taylor's Discussion
with three ministers in France; early volumes of Millennial Star,
Spencer's Letters--in fact all the early Church literature. Of late
opponents of the Book of Mormon have not pressed this point of
controversy, since the sectarian arguments respecting it have been
utterly demolished. For a brief consideration of the various points of
that argument see "New Witnesses for God," Vol. I., Ch. viii.

6. View of the Hebrews, pp. 187, 188

7. See chapter xxix, especially taking account of foot note references.

8. Dictionary of the Book of Mormon, Reynolds, p. 168. And Vol. II, pp.

9. Vol. II, pp. 157-8.

10. See this volume, pp. 46-48.

11. See III. Nephi xv, xvi, xvii.

12. The statement here that Ishmael was of Ephraim is set down upon
the authority, first, of inference. The inference is based upon the
fact as already stated that there are promises in the Hebrew scriptures
respecting Ephraim which cannot be realized so far as we know, except
through the seed of Ephraim dwelling upon the land of America, as
we have seen in considering the evidence of the Bible for the truth
of the Book of Mormon; and as Lehi and his family were of the tribe
of Manasseh, and Mulek's colony being Jews, it leaves the family of
Ishmael, and perhaps Zoram, the servant of Laban to introduce the
descendants of Ephraim into the western world. Second, a number of
Latter-day Saints, familiarly acquainted with the Prophet Joseph
Smith, declare that in conversation they had known him to say that in
Mormon's abridgment of the book of Lehi (which supplied the 116 pages
of manuscript lost by Martin Harris) it was plainly stated that Ishmael
was of the tribe of Ephraim. Among those who heard such remarks was
the late Elder Franklin D. Richards, of the Council of the Apostles
and Church Historian, who records his recollection of the Prophet's
statement in the following manner:

"One day in the autumn of that year, (1843) as I was passing near,
(the "Nauvoo Mansion") it being in warm weather, I observed the door
standing open and the Prophet Joseph inside conversing with one of
the brethren, leaning against the counter. It being a public house, I
ventured to walk in, and scarcely had more than time to exchange usual
civilities, when this brother said: 'Brother Joseph, how is it that we
call the Book of Mormon the Stick of Joseph, in the hands of Ephraim,
when the book itself tells us that Lehi was of the lineage of Manasseh?
I cannot find in it about the seed of Ephraim dwelling on this land at
all.' Joseph replied: 'You will recollect that when Lehi and his family
had gone from Jerusalem out into the wilderness, he sent his son Nephi
back to the city to get the plates which contained the law of Moses and
many prophecies of the prophets, and that he also brought out Ishmael
and his family, which were mostly daughters. This Ishmael and his
family were of the lineage of Ephraim, and Lehi's sons took Ishmael's
daughters for wives, and this is how they have grown together, 'a
multitude of nations in the midst of the earth.'

"'If we had those one hundred and sixteen pages of manuscript which
Martin Harris got away with, you would know all about it, for Ishmael's
ancestry is made very plain therein. The Lord told me not to translate
it over again, but to take from Nephi's other plates until I came to
the period of time where the other translation was broken off, and
then go on with Mormon's abridgment again. That is how it came about
that Ishmael's lineage was not given in the Book of Mormon, as well as
Lehi's."'--Frankling D. Richards, "The Contributor," Vol. XVII, p. 425.

13. Ether iii.

14. I. Nephi x: 11, 12.

15. See I. Nephi v: 11.

16. Ether i: 3-6.

17. History of America Before Columbus, P. De Roo, Vol. I., 423, 424.

18. Ibid. p. 517.

19. Conquest of Peru, Vol. I., pp. 96, 97.

20. History of America Before Columbus, Vol. I., pp. 523-4.

21. Native Races, Vol. III., pp. 438-9

22. Prehistoric America, p.531.




_The Fall of Adam--The Purpose of Man's Earth Existence._

In the matter of some Christian truths, it sets forth, as well as in
some it emphasizes, the Book of Mormon is original; and in none more so
than in dealing with the doctrine of Adam's fall, and the purpose of
man's existence.

In the second book of Nephi, chapter ii, occurs the following direct,
explicit statement:

    Adam fell that men might be: and men are that they might have joy.

This sentence is the summing up of a somewhat lengthy discussion
on the atonement, by the prophet Lehi. It is a most excellent and
important generalization, and is worthy to be classed with the
great generalizations of the Jewish scriptures, such for instance
as that in the closing chapter of Ecclesiastes, "Fear God and keep
his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man;" Paul's famous
generalization: "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be
made alive:" or the Apostle James' summing up of religion: "Pure
religion, and undefiled before God and the Father, is this, To visit
the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep one's self
unspotted from the world." Or of Messiah's great summing up of the
whole law and gospel; "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first
and great commandment, and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt
love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the
law and all the prophets." I care not whether you regard the literary
excellence of this Book of Mormon generalization or the importance of
the great truths which it announces, I repeat, it is worthy in every
way to stand with the great generalizations quoted above. It deals with
two of the mightiest problems of theology:

1st, The reason for Adam's fall;

2nd, The purpose of man's existence.

Before entering into a consideration of these doctrines, however,
I must establish the fact of their Book of Mormon originality; for
I fancy there will be many who at first glance will be disposed to
question their being original with that book. It must be conceded, of
course, that the fact of man's fall is frequently mentioned in the
Bible. The story of it is told at length in Genesis. [1] It is the
subject of some of Paul's discourses; [2] and, indeed, it underlies the
whole Christian scheme for the redemption and salvation of mankind.
Yet, strange to say, there is not to be found a direct, explicit, and
adequate statement in all the Jewish scriptures as to _why_ Adam fell.
The same may be said with reference to the second part of this passage.
That is, there is nowhere in Jewish scriptures a direct, explicit,
adequate statement as to the _object_ of man's existence.

These statements with reference to the absence of anything in Holy
scripture on these two important points, will, I know, be regarded as
extremely bold; and especially when made with reference to so large a
body of literature as is comprised in the Bible. Yet I make them with
confidence; and am helped to that conclusion from the fact that nowhere
in the creeds of men, based upon Jewish and Christian scripture, is
there to be found a direct statement upon these two subjects that has
in it the warrant of explicit, scriptural authority. Nowhere in the
creeds of men--the creeds of men! those generalizations of Christian
truths as men have conceived those truths to be; those deductions from
the teachings of Holy scripture--nowhere in them, I repeat are these
two great theological questions disposed of on scriptural authority.

The Westminister Confession of Faith, which embodies the accepted
doctrine of one of the largest sects of Protestant Christendom, while
it indeed has a word, in fact several sections on the subject of Adam's
fall and its consequences, it contents itself with stating the fact of
it, the manner of it, as also, that God permitted it, "having purposed
to order it to his own glory," yet in such manner as himself not to be
chargeable with the responsibility of the sin; but nowhere is there
an explanation of _why_ Adam fell. With reference to the purpose of
man's creation--included in the treatment of the purpose of creation in
general--the creed ascribes the purpose of all the creative acts of God
to be "The manifestation of the glory of his eternal power, wisdom and
goodness." [3] and in an authoritative explanation of this part of the
creed it is said, "The design of God in creation was the manifestation
of his own glory." And again: "Our confession very explicitly takes the
position that the chief end of God in his eternal purposes and in their
temporal execution in creation and providence is the manifestation of
his own glory. The scriptures explicity assert that this is the chief
end of God in creation. [4]. * * * * * The manifestation of his own
glory is intrinsically the highest and worthiest end that God could
purpose to Himself." [5]

The only business I have here with this declaration of the purpose of
God in creation--including the creation of man, of course--is simply to
call attention to the fact that it nowhere has the direct warrant of

The creed of the "Episcopalian Church," whose chief doctrines are
embodied in "The Book of Common Prayer," is silent upon the two
subjects in question, viz., "why" Adam fell; the "object" of man's
existence. The "Articles of Faith," it is true, speak of the "fall" of
Adam, and its effects upon the human race, but nowhere is it said "why"
Adam fell; or a "reason" given for man's existence. The creed proclaims
faith in God, "the Maker and Preserver of all things, both visible and
invisible;" but nowhere declares the purpose of that creation, and
consequently has no word as to the "object" of man's existence.

The exposition of the Catholic creed on the same points, as set forth
in the Douay Catechism is as follows--and first as to the fall:

Man was created in "the state of original justice, and perfection
of all natural gifts;" this "original justice" was lost "by Adam's
disobedience to God in eating the for-bidden fruit;" but nowhere is
there anything said as to the reason for this fall from the state of
"original justice."

As to the purpose of man's creation, the Catechism has the following:

    Ques. What signify the words creation of heaven and earth?

    Ans. They signify that God made heaven and earth and all creatures
    in them of nothing, by his word only.

    Ques. What moved God to make them?

    Ans. His own goodnesss, so that he may communicate himself to angels
    and to man for whom he made all other creatures. [6]

Speaking of the creation of the angels, the same work continues:

    Ques. For what end did God create them (the angels).

    Ans. To be partakers of his glory and to be our guardians.

Referring again to man's creation the following occurs:

    Ques. Do we owe much to God for creation?

    Ans. Very much, because he made us in such a perfect state,
    creating us for himself, and all things else for us. [7]

From all which it may be summarized that the purposes of God in the
creation of man and angels, according to Catholic theology, is--

First, that God might communicate himself to them; Second, that they
might be partakers of his glory.

Third, that he created them for himself, and all things else for them.

While this may be in part the truth, and so far excellent, it has no
higher warrant of authority than human deduction, based on conjecture,
not scripture; and it certainly falls far short of giving to man--as
we shall see--that "pride of place" in existence to which his higher
nature and his dignity as a son of God entitles him.

If in these creeds of the greater divisions of Christendom there is
found no clear and adequate explanation of the reason of Adam's fall,
or the purpose of man's existence, it may be taken for granted that
none of the minor divisions of Christendom have succeeded where these
have failed, since these larger divisions of Christendom embody in
their creeds the hived theological wisdom and the highest scholarship
of the Christian ages.

The originality of these two Book of Mormon Doctrines established, let
us now consider if they are true and of what value they are, and what
effect they will probably have upon the ideas of men. I shall treat
them separately first, and in relation afterwards.

"Adam fell that men might be."

I think it cannot be doubted when the whole story of man's fall is
taken into account that in some way--however hidden it may be under
allegory--his fall was closely associated with the propagation of the
race. Before the fall we are told that Adam and Eve were in a state of
innocence; [8] but after the fall "The eyes of them both were opened
and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together
and made themselves aprons," [9] and also hid from the presence of the

In an incidental way Paul gives us to understand that Adam in the
matter of the first transgression "was not deceived," but that the
woman was. [10] It therefore follows that Adam must have sinned
knowingly, and perhaps deliberately; making choice of obedience between
two laws pressing upon him. With his spouse, Eve, he had received a
commandment from God to be fruitful, to perpetuate his race in the
earth. He had also been told not to partake of a certain fruit of
the Garden of Eden; but according to the story of Genesis, as also
according to the assertion of Paul, Eve, who with Adam received
the commandment to multiply in the earth, was deceived, and by the
persuasion of Lucifer induced to partake of the forbidden fruit. She,
therefore, was in transgression, and subject to the penalty of that
law which from the scriptures we learn included banishment from Eden,
banishment from the presence of God, and also the death of the body.
This meant, if Eve were permitted to stand alone in her transgression,
that she must be alone also in suffering the penalty. In that event
she would have been separated from Adam, which necessarily would have
prevented obedience to the commandment given to them conjointly to
multiply in the earth. In the presence of this situation, therefore,
it is to be believed that Adam was not deceived, either by the cunning
of Lucifer or the blandishments of the woman, deliberately, and with a
full knowledge of his act and its consequences, and in order to carry
out the purpose of God in the existence of man in the earth, shared
alike the woman's transgression and its effects, and this in order
that the first great commandment he had received from God, viz.--"Be
fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth, and subdue it"--might
not fail of fulfillment. Hence "Adam fell that man might be."

The effect of this doctrine upon the ideas of men concerning the great
Patriarch of our race will be revolutionary. It seems to be the fashion
of those who assume to teach the Christian religion to denounce Adam
in unmeasured terms; as if the fall of man had surprised, if, indeed,
it did altogether thwart, the original plan of God respecting the
existence of man in the earth. The creeds of the churches generally
fail to consider the "fall" as part of God's purpose regarding this
world, and, in its way, as essential to the accomplishment of that
purpose as the "redemption" through Jesus Christ. Certainly there would
have been no occasion for the "redemption" had there been no "fall;"
and hence no occasion for the display of all that wealth of grace and
mercy and justice and love--all that richness of experience involved
in the gospel of Jesus Christ, had there been no "fall." It cannot be
but that it was part of God's purpose to display these qualities in
their true relation, for the benefit and blessing and experience and
enlargement and ultimate uplifting of man; and since there would have
been no occasion for displaying them but for the "fall," it logically
follows that the "fall," no less than the "redemption," must have been
part of God's original plan respecting the earth-probation of man. The
"fall," undoubtedly was a fact as much present to the fore-knowledge
of God as was the "redemption;" and the act which encompassed it must
be regarded as more praise-worthy than blame-worthy, since it was
essential to the accomplishment of the divine purpose. Yet, as I say,
those who assume to teach Christianity roundly denounce Adam for his
transgression. An accepted teacher of Catholic doctrine says:

    The Catholic Church teaches that Adam, by his sin, has not only
    caused harm to himself, but to the whole human race; that by it
    he lost the supernatural justice and holiness which he received
    gratuitously from God, and lost it, not only for himself, but also
    for all of us; and that he, having stained himself with the sin of
    disobedience, has transmitted not only death and other bodily pains
    and infirmities to the whole human race, but also sin, which is the
    death of the soul. [11]

And again:

    Unhappily, Adam, by his sin of disobedience, which was also a sin
    of pride, disbelief, and ambition, forfeited, or, more properly
    speaking, rejected that original justice; and we, as members of the
    human family, of which he was the head, are also implicated in that
    guilt of self-spoliation, or rejection and deprivation of those
    supernatural gifts; not, indeed, on account of our having willed
    it with our personal will, but by having willed it with the will
    of our first parent, to whom we are linked by nature as members to
    their head. [12]

Still again, and this from the Catholic Douay Catechism:

    Q. How did we lose original justice?

    A. By Adam's disobedience to God in eating the forbidden fruit.

    Q. How do you prove that?

    A. Out of Rom. v: 12, "By one man sin entered into the world, and
    by sin death; and so into all men death did pass, in whom all have

    Q. Had man ever died if he had never sinned?

    A. He would not, but would live in a state of justice and at length
    would be translated alive to the fellowship of the angels. [13]

From a Protestant source I quote the following:

    In the fall of man we may observe: (1) The greatest infidelity. (2)
    Prodigious pride. (3) Horrid ingratitude. (4) Visible contempt of
    God's majesty and justice. (5) Unaccountable folly. (6) A cruelty
    to himself and to all his posterity. [14]

Another Protestant authority says:

    The tree of knowledge of good and evil revealed to those who ate
    its fruit secrets of which they had better have remained ignorant;
    for the purity of man's happiness consisted in doing and loving
    good without even knowing evil. [15]

From these several passages as also indeed from the whole tenor of
Christian writings upon this subject, the fall of Adam is quite
generally deplored and upon him is laid a very heavy burden of
responsibility. It was he, they complain, who,

    Brought death into the world, and all our woe.

One great division of Christendom in its creed, it is true, in dealing
with the fall, concedes that "God was pleased according to his wise and
holy counsel, to permit [the fall] having purposed to order it to his
own glory." [16]

And in an authoritative explanation of this section they say, "That
this sin [the fall] was permissively embraced in the sovereign purpose
of God." And still further in explanation:

    Its purpose [i. e., of the fall] being God's general plan, and one
    eminently wise and righteous, to introduce all the new created
    subjects of moral government into a state of probation for a time
    in which he makes their permanent character and destiny depend upon
    their own action.

Still, this sin, described as being permissively embraced in the
sovereign purpose of Deity, God designed "to order it to his own
glory;" but it nowhere appears according to this confession of faith
that the results of the fall are to be of any benefit to man. The
only thing consulted in the theory of this creed seems to be the
manifestation of the glory of God--a thing which represents God as a
most selfish being--but just how the glory of God can be manifested
by the "fall" which, according to this creed, results in the eternal
damnation of the overwhelming majority of his "creatures," is not quite

Those who made this Westminister Confession, as also the large
following which accept it, concede that their theory involves them at
least in two difficulties which they confess it is impossible for them
to overcome. These are, respectively: First, "How could sinful desires
or volitions originate in the soul of mortal agents created holy like
Adam and Eve;" and, second, "how can sin be permissively embraced in
the eternal purpose of God and not involve him as responsible for the
sin?" "If it be asked," say they, "why God, who abhors sin, and who
benevolently desires the excellence and happiness of his creatures,
should sovereignly determine to permit such a fountain of pollution,
degradation, and misery to be opened, we can only say, with profound
reverence, 'Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight."' [17]

These difficulties, however, are the creed's and those who accept it,
not ours, and do not further concern our discussion at this point.

Infidels--under which general term (and I do not use it offensively)
I mean all those who do not accept the Christian creeds, nor believe
the Bible to be a revelation--infidels, I say, quite generally deride
the fall of man as represented both in the creeds of Christendom and
in the Bible. They regard the tremendous consequences attendant upon
eating the forbidden fruit as altogether out of proportion with the act
itself, and universally hold that a moral economy which would either
design or permit such a calamity as the fall is generally supposed to
be, as altogether unworthy of an all-merciful and just Deity. Thomas
Paine referring to it says:

    "Putting aside everything that might excite laughter by its
    absurdity, or detestation by its profaneness, and confining
    ourselves merely to an examination of the parts, it is impossible
    to conceive a story more derogatory to the Almighty, more
    inconsistent with his wisdom, more contradictory to his power, than
    this story is. [18]

In their contentions against the story of Genesis, no less than in
their war upon "the fall" and "original sin" in the men made creeds of
Christendom, infidels have denounced God in most blasphemous terms as
the author of all the evil in this world by permitting, through not
preventing, the fall; and they as soundly ridicule and abuse Adam for
the part he took in the affair. He has been held up by them as weak and
cowardly, because he referred his partaking of the forbidden fruit to
the fact that the woman gave to him and he did eat; a circumstance into
which they read an effort on the part of the man to escape censure,
perhaps punishment, and to cast the blame for his transgression upon
the woman. These scoffers proclaim their preference for the variations
of this story of a "fall of man" as found in the mythologies of various
peoples, say those of Greece or India. [19] But all this aside. The
truth is that nothing could be more courageous, sympathetic, or nobly
honorable than the course of our world's great Patriarch in his
relations to his wife Eve and the "fall." The woman by deception is
led into transgression, and stands under the penalty of a broken law.
Banishment from the presence of God; banishment from the presence
of her husband, if he partakes not with her in the transgression;
dissolution of spirit and body--physical death--all await her!
Thereupon, the man, not deceived, but knowingly (as we are assured by
Paul), also transgresses. Why? In one aspect of the case in order that
he might share the woman's banishment from the dear presence of God,
and with her die--than which no higher proof of love could be given--no
nobler act of chivalry performed. But primarily he transgressed that
"Man might be." He transgressed a less important law that he might
comply with one more important, if one may so speak of any of God's
laws. The facts are, as we shall presently see, that the conditions
which confronted Adam in his earth-life were afore time known to him;
that of his own volition he accepted them, and came to earth to meet

Man an Immortal Spirit.

Man is an immortal spirit. By saying that, I mean not only a never
ending existence for the "soul" of man in the future, through the
resurrection, but a proper immortality that means the eternal existence
of the "ego"--interchangeably called "mind," "spirit," "soul,"
"intelligence." I mean existence before birth as well as existence
after death. I believe that an "immortality" which refers to continued
existence after death only is but half a truth. A real immortality is
forever immortal, and includes an existence before life on earth as
surely as an existence after death. [20] This view of the intelligence
or spirit of man is supported by the Bible. Without going into the
subject at length I call attention to the fact that Jesus himself had
very clear conceptions of his own spirit-existence before his birth
into this world; a fact which is evident from the declaration he made
to the Jews when he said, "Verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was,
I am." [21] (i. e. existed). And again, in his prayer in Gethsemane, "O
Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had
with thee before the world was." [22] This spirit pre-existence extends
also to all the children of men; who, in their physical structure
and even in faculties of mind, so nearly resembled Jesus, though, of
course, immeasurably below him in the developed excellence of those
qualities. We read of the "sons of God shouting for joy" in heaven
when the foundations of the earth were laid; [23] of the war in heaven
when Michael and his angels fought against the dragon (Satan), and the
dragon and his angels fought, and he with them was cast out into the
earth. [24] These were the angels which kept not their first estate,
but left their own habitation, and who are reserved in everlasting
chains unto the judgment of the last days. [25] "Before I formed thee
in the belly I knew thee," said the Lord to Jeremiah, "and sanctified
thee and ordained thee a prophet unto the nations;" [26] "We have had
fathers of the flesh, and we give them reverence," said Paul to the
Hebrews, "Shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the father of
spirits and live?" [27] All of which passages tend to prove that not
only Jesus but the spirits of all men existed before they tabernacled
in the flesh. This of course is but a brief glance at the question as
supported by the Jewish scriptures. [28]

The Book of Mormon while not in any formal manner teaching this
doctrine of the pre-existence of the spirits of men, does so very
effectually in an incidental way. For example: the Lord Jesus, long
ages before his advent into earth-life, revealed himself to the Book of
Mormon character known as the Brother of Jared, and in doing so he said:

    Behold I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world
    to redeem my people; * * * and never have I showed myself unto man
    whom I have created, for never has man believed in me as thou hast.
    Seest thou that ye are created after mine own image [likeness]?
    Yea, even all men were created in the beginning after mine own
    image. Behold this body which ye now behold, is the body of my
    spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and
    even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit, will I appear unto
    my people in the flesh. [29]

Here a great doctrine is revealed. Not only the fact of the
pre-existence of the spirit of Jesus, the Christ, that is, the
existence of his spirit in tangible, human form before his earthly
existence, but a like existence for the spirits of all men is
proclaimed. Moreover, it is made known that as Jesus appeared in the
spirit to this Jaredite prophet, so would he appear unto his people
in the flesh. That is to say, the bodily form of flesh and bone would
conform in appearance to the spirit form; the earthly would be like
unto the heavenly, the human, to the divine. And so with all men.

Christian theologians are thought to have discovered a great truth
when in the preface of St. John's Gospel they found the doctrine of
the co-eternity and co-divinity of the Father and the Son in the holy
trinity; namely,

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
    Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. * * * And the
    Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory,
    the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and
    truth. [30]

The identity between the "Word" of this passage and Jesus--the
"Word made flesh" is complete. And he was in the beginning with
God--co-eternal with him; and the "Word was God."--that is, he was
divine, he was more, he was Divinity--he was Deity.

In a revelation to Joseph Smith this same truth is repeated and more is
added to it, as follows:

    Verily, I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father,
    and am the first-born. * * * Ye [referring to the Elders in whose
    presence the revelation was given] were also in the beginning with
    the Father; that which is spirit [that is, that part of man which
    is spirit, that was in the beginning with the Father]. * * Man [i.
    e., the race, the term is generic] was also in the beginning with
    God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made,
    neither indeed can be. [31]

The doctrine in the foregoing quotation is in harmony with the Book of
Mormon and with the Bible; but goes beyond them in that it gives us
the understanding "that intelligence was not created or made, neither
indeed can be." That is to say, the individual intelligence in all men
was not created, or made, "neither indeed can be"--it is not only not
created but is _uncreatable_.

There is something in man, then, that is eternal, uncreate. Just what
that is, the form of it, or the mode of its existence, we may not know,
since it has not pleased God so far to reveal these aspects of it. But
he has revealed the fact of its existence, the fact of its eternity,
the fact that it is an intelligence. One must needs think, too, that
the name of this eternal entity--what God calls him--conveys to the
mind some idea of his nature. He is called an "Intelligence;" and this
I believe is descriptive of him. That is, intelligence is the entity's
chief characteristic. If this be a true deduction, then the entity must
be conscious; conscious of self and of other things than self. He must
have the power to distinguish himself from other things--the "me" from
the "not me." He must have power of deliberation, by which he sets over
one thing against another; with power also to form a judgment that this
or that is a better thing or state than some other thing or state.
Also there goes with this idea of intelligence a power of choosing one
thing instead of another, one state rather than another--the power to
will to do this or that, else existence is meaningless, worthless,
mockery. These powers are inseparably connected with any idea that may
be formed of an intelligence. One cannot conceive of an intelligence
existing without these qualities any more than he can conceive of an
object existing in space without dimensions. The phrase, "the light of
truth." is given in the revelation above quoted as the equivalent of an
"Intelligence" here discussed; by which it is meant to be understood,
as I think, that intelligent entities perceive truth, are conscious of
truth, they know that which is, hence "the light of truth," that which
cognizes truth--"intelligences." These intelligences are begotten [32]
spirits that exist in human form. They exist so before they tabernacle
in the flesh. In this manner, first, and eternally, as an individual
intelligence, and secondly as a begotten spirit in human form, Jesus
existed; so the spirits of all men existed; so Adam existed, a Son of
God, for so the scriptures declare him to be. [33]

In addition to teaching the doctrine of the pre-existence of man's
spirit, the Book of Mormon teaches also the indestructibility of the
spirit. The prophet Alma expressly says, that "the soul would never
die;" [34] which, according to Orson Pratt, in a foot note on the
passage, means that the "soul" could "never be dissolved, or its
parts be separated so as to disorganize the spiritual personage;" and
since the Book of Mormon teaches the pre-existence of this "soul,"
or "spirit," and also teaches its continued existence between death
and the resurrection, [35] as also its indestructibility after the
resurrection, [36] it is very clear that the Book of Mormon teaches
what I have called "proper immortality of the soul;" an immortality
that extends pastward as well as foreward in time; or, in other words,
declares its essential, its eternal existence; hence its necessary
existence, hence that it is a self-existing entity.

In thinking then upon this earth career of Adam's, it must be thought
of in connection with that pre-existence of his, of that eternal
existence of his, and of his knowledge of what would befall him when
he came to the earth. He came on no fool's errand, to be betrayed by
chance happenings. If redemption through Jesus Christ was a foreknown
circumstance,--and it was--and he was appointed as the "Lamb slain from
the foundation of the world," [37] to bring to pass man's redemption,
then surely the circumstance of man's fall was known, doubtless
pre-determined upon, and in some way essential to the accomplishment of
the purposes of God; not an accidental or even a temporary thwarting
of them; but as much a part of God's plan with reference to man's
earth-existence, as any circumstance whatsoever connected with that

Let us now consider the second part of Lehi's Generalization:

Men are that they might have joy.

That is to say, the purpose of man's earth-life is in some way to be
made to contribute to his "joy," which is but another way of saying,
that man's earth-life is to eventuate in his advantage.

"Men are that they might have joy!" What is meant by that? Have we
here the reappearance of the old Epicurean doctrine, "pleasure is the
supreme good, and chief end of life?" No, verily! Nor any other form of
old "hedonism" [38]--the Greek ethics of gross self-interest. For mark,
in the first place, the different words "joy" and "pleasure." They are
not synonymous. The first does not necessarily arise from the second,
"joy" may arise from quite other sources than "pleasure," from pain,
even, when the endurance of pain is to eventuate in the achievement
of some good: such as the travail of a mother in bringing forth her
offspring; the weariness and pain and danger of toil by a father, to
secure comforts for loved ones. Moreover, whatever apologists may say,
it is very clear that the "pleasure" of the Epicurean philosophy,
hailed as "the supreme good and chief end in life," was to arise from
agreeable sensations, or what ever gratified the senses, and hence
was, in the last analysis of it--in its roots and branches--in its
theory and in its practice--"sensualism." It was to result in physical
ease and comfort, and mental inactivity--other than a conscious,
self-complacence--being regarded as "the supreme good and chief end
of life." I judge this to be the net result of this philosophy since
these are the very conditions in which Epicureans describe even the
gods to exist; [39] and surely men could not hope for more "pleasure,"
or greater happiness than that possessed by their gods. Cicero even
charges that the sensualism of Epicurus was so gross that he represents
him as blaming his brother, Timocrates, "because he would not allow
that everything which had any reference to a happy life was to be
measured by the belly; nor has he," continues Cicero, "said this once
only, but often."

This is not the "joy," it is needles to say, contemplated in the Book
of Mormon. Nor is the "joy" there contemplated the "joy" of mere
innocence--mere innocence, which say what you will of it, is but a
negative sort of virtue. A virtue that is colorless, never quite
sure of itself, always more or less uncertain, because untried. [40]
Such a virtue--if mere absence of vice may be called virtue--would
be unproductive of that "joy" the attainment of which is set forth
in the Book of Mormon as the purpose of man's existence; for in the
context it is written, "They [Adam and Eve] would have remained in a
state of 'innocence.' Having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing
no good, for they knew no sin." From which it appears that the "joy"
contemplated in our Book of Mormon passage is to arise from something
more than mere innocence, which is, impliedly, unproductive of "joy."
The "joy" contemplated in the Book of Mormon passage is to arise out
of man's rough and thorough knowledge of evil, of sin; through knowing
misery, sorrow, pain and suffering; through seeing good and evil
locked in awful conflict; through a consciousness of having chosen
in that conflict the better part, the good; and not only in having
chosen it, but in having wedded it by eternal compact; made it his
by right of conquest over evil. It is a "joy" that will arise from a
consciousness of having "fought the good fight," of having "kept the
faith." It will arise from a consciousness of moral, spiritual and
physical strength. Of strength gained in conflict. The strength that
comes from experience; from having sounded the depths of the soul; from
experiencing all emotions of which mind is susceptible; from testing
all the qualities and strength of the intellect. A "joy" that will come
to man from a contemplation of the universe, and a consciousness that
he is an heir to all that is--a joint heir with Jesus Christ and God;
from knowing that he is an essential part of all that is. It is a joy
that will be born of the consciousness of existence itself--that will
revel in existence--in thoughts of and realizations of existence's
limitless possibilities. A "joy" born of the consciousness of the
power of eternal increase. A "joy" arising from association with the
Intelligences of innumerable heavens--the Gods of all eternities. A
"joy," born of a consciousness of being, of intelligence, of faith,
knowledge, light, truth, mercy, justice, love, glory, dominion, wisdom,
power; all feelings, affections, emotions, passions; all heights and
all depths! "Men are that they might have joy;" and that "joy" is based
upon and contemplates all that is here set down.

We may now consider the "fall of man" and the "purpose of his
existence" as related subjects--as standing somewhat in the
relationship of means to an end. We shall now be able to regard the
"fall of man," not as an accident, not as surprising, and all but
thwarting, God's purposes, but as part of the divinely appointed
program of man's earth-existence.

Here, then, stands the truth so far as it may be gathered from God's
word and the nature of things: There is in man an eternal, uncreate,
self-existing entity, call it "intelligence," "mind," "spirit,"
"soul"--what you will, so long as you recognize it, and regard its
nature as eternal. There came a time when in the progress of things,
(which is only another way of saying in the "nature of things") an
earth career, or earth existence, because of the things it has to
teach, was necessary to the enlargement, to the advancement of these
"intelligences," these "spirits," "souls." Hence an earth is prepared;
and one sufficiently advanced and able, by the nature of him to bring
to pass the events, is chosen, through whom this earth-existence,
with all its train of events--its mingled miseries and comforts, its
sorrows and joys, its pains and pleasures, its good, and its evil--may
be brought to pass. He comes to earth with his appointed spouse. He
comes primarily to bring to pass man's earth life. He comes to the earth
with the solemn injunction upon him: "Be fruitful and multiply, and
replenish the earth, and subdue it." But he comes with the knowledge
that this earth-existence of eternal "Intelligences" is to be lived
under circumstances that will contribute to their enlargement, to their
advancement. They are to experience joy and sorrow, pain and pleasure;
witness the effect of good and evil, and exercise their agency in the
choice of good or of evil. To accomplish this end, the local, or earth
harmony of things must be broken. Evil to be seen, and experienced,
must enter the world, which can only come to pass through the violation
of law. The law is given--"of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eatest of it thou
shalt surely die." The woman forgetful of the purpose of the earth
mission of herself and spouse is led by flattery and deceit into the
violation of that law, and becomes subject to its penalties--merely
another name for its effect. But the man, not deceived, but discerning
clearly the path of duty, and in order that earth-existence may be
provided for the great hosts of spirits to come to earth under the
conditions prescribed--he also transgresses the law, not only that
men might be, but that they might have that being under the very
circumstances deemed essential to the enlargement, to the progress of
eternal Intelligences. Adam did not sin because deceived by another.
He did not sin maliciously, or with evil intent; or to gratify an
inclination to rebellion against God, or to thwart the Divine purposes,
or to manifest his own pride. Had his act of sin involved the taking
of life rather than eating a forbidden fruit, it would be regarded
as a "sacrifice" rather than a "murder." This to show the nature of
Adam's transgression. It was a transgression of the law--"for sin is
the transgression of the law" [41]--that conditions deemed necessary to
the progress of eternal Intelligences might obtain. Adam sinned that
men might be, and not only "be," but "be" under conditions essential
to progress. But Adam did sin. He did break the law; and violation
of law involves the violator in its penalties, as surely as effect
follows cause. Upon this principle depends the dignity and majesty of
law. Take this fact away from moral government and your moral laws
become mere nullities. Therefore, notwithstanding Adam fell that men
might be, in his transgression there was at bottom a really exalted
motive--a motive that contemplated nothing less than bringing to pass
the highly necessary purposes of God with respect to man's existence
in the earth--yet his transgression of law was followed by certain
moral effects in the nature of men and in the world. The harmony of
things was broken; discord ruled; changed relations between God and
men took place, darkness, sin and death stalked through the world,
and conditions were brought to pass in the midst of which the eternal
Intelligences might gain those experiences that such conditions have to

Now as to the second part of the great truth--"men are that they might
have joy"--viewed also in the light of the "Intelligence" or "spirit"
in man being an eternal, uncreated, self-existing entity. Remembering
what I have already said in these pages as to the nature of this "joy"
which it is the purpose of earth-existence to secure, remembering
from what it is to arise--from the highest possible development--the
highest conceivable enlargement of physical, intellectual, moral
and spiritual power--what other conceivable purpose for existence
in earth-life could there be for eternal Intelligences than this
attainment of "joy" springing from progress? Man's existence for the
manifestation alone of God's glory, as taught by the creeds of men,
is not equal to it. That view represents man as but a thing created,
and God as selfish and vain of glory. True, the Book of Mormon idea of
the purpose of man's existence, is accompanied by a manifestation of
God's glory; for with the progress of Intelligences there must be an
ever widening manifestation of the glory of God. It is written that
the "glory of God is Intelligence;" and it must follow, as clearly as
the day follows night, that with the enlargement, with the progress
of Intelligences, there must ever be a constantly increasing splendor
in the manifestation of the glory of God. But in the Book of Mormon
doctrine, the manifestation of that glory is incidental. The primary
purpose is not in that manifestation, but in the "joy" arising from the
progress of Intelligences. And yet that fact adds to the glory of God,
but our book represents the Lord as seeking the enlargement and "joy"
of kindred Intelligences, rather than the mere selfish manifestation
of his own, personal glory. "This is my work and my glory," says the
Lord, in another "Mormon" scripture, "to bring to pass the immortality
and eternal life of man, as man;" [42] and therein is God's "joy." A
"joy" that grows from the progress of others; from bringing to pass
the immortality and eternal life of "man." Not the immortality of the
"spirit" of man, mark you, for that immortality already exists, but to
bring to pass the immortality of the spirit and body in their united
condition, and which together constitutes "man." [43] And the purpose
for which man is, is that he might have "joy;" that "joy" which, in
the last analysis of things, should be even as God's "joy," and God's
glory, namely, the bringing to pass the progress, enlargement, and
"joy" of others.

It is gratifying to know that this Book of Mormon definition of life
and its purpose, so far as it affects the human race, is receiving
unconscious support from some of the first philosophers of modern
days, among whom I may mention Lester F. Ward, author of "Outlines of
Sociology" and other scientific and philosophical works; a Lecturer
in the School of Sociology of the Hartford Society for Education
Extension. His "Outlines of Sociology" was published in 1904, and
in the chapter of that work, in which he discusses the relation of
sociology to psychology, (chapter v), he deals with the question of
life and its object. For the purpose of clearly setting forth his
thought, he says:

"The biological [i. e. that which pertains merely to the life] must be
clearly marked off from the psychological [i. e. as here used, that
which pertains to feeling] standpoint. The former," he continues,
"is that of function, the latter that of feeling. It is convenient,
and almost necessary, in order to gain a correct conception of these
relations to personify Nature, as it were, and bring her into strong
contrast with the sentient [one capable of perception is here meant]
creature. Thus viewed, each may be conceived to have its own special
end. The end of Nature is function, i. e. life. It is biological.
The end of the creature is feeling, i. e. it is psychic. From the
standpoint of Nature, feeling is a means to function. From the
standpoint of the organism, function is a means to feeling. Pleasure
and pain came into existence in order that a certain class of beings
might live, but those beings, having been given existence, now live in
order to enjoy."

Throughout the chapter he maintains that the purpose of man's existence
is for pleasure, but of course, holds that this pleasure is that of
the highest order, and not merely sensual pleasure. Finally, applying
the principles he lays down to the human race, its existence, the
purpose of that existence, and the means through which the end is to be
obtained--he adopts the following formula:

    The object of nature is function [i. e., life].

    The object of man is happiness.

    The object of society is effort.

Now, with very slight modifications, this formula may be made to
express the doctrine of Lehi in the Book of Mormon, as representing the
divine economy respecting man:

    Earth-life became essential to the progress of intelligences.

    Adam fell that man's earth-life might be realized.

    The purpose of man's existence is that he might have joy.

    The purpose of the gospel is to bring to pass that joy.

In condensed form it may be made to stand as follows:

    The object of God in man's earth-life is progress.

    The object of man's existence is joy.

    The object of the gospel and the church is effort.

A formula which so closely resembles this philosopher's--and his
philosophy is that of many other advanced modern thinkers--that it
justifies me in making the claim that the trend of the best modern
thought on these lines is coming into harmony with the truths stated in
the Book of Mormon.


_The Agency of Man._

Respecting the "free agency" of man the Book of Mormon is quite
pronounced as to the fact of it, as the following quotations attest:

    I know that he granteth unto men according to their desire, whether
    it be unto death or unto life; yea, I know that he allotteth unto
    men, according to their wills; whether they be unto salvation or
    unto destruction. [44]


    The Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Men are
    free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which
    are expedient unto man. And they are free to chose liberty and
    eternal life, through the great mediation of all men, or to choose
    captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the
    devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto
    himself. [45]

The doctrine of the free agency of man could scarcely be more strongly
set forth than it is in these passages.

A word in relation to this question of free agency. Of course it is
recognized as one of the great theological questions that has puzzled
mankind. By the phrase, free agency is here meant to represent that
power or capacity of the mind or spirit to act freely and of its own
volition, with reference to these matters, that are within the power
of its achievement. That is to say, it is not meant that by an act of
will man may overcome the force we call gravitation, and leave the
earth at his pleasure; or that he can pluck down the moon by an act of
will; or influence a mass of people at his will and against theirs; or
create two mountains without a valley between them; but what is meant
is, that man possesses the quality of determining his own actions, his
own course with reference to things that are within the realm of the
possibility of his achievement, and more especially, with reference to
moral questions; that man has the power to take a course in harmony
with those moral ideals that he has created by his own intellectual
force or that have been created for him by his education, or the
environment in which he has lived; that he can decide for himself to
walk in harmony with these ideals, or that wontingly, and against all
that he conceives to be to his best interest, he can violate them and
walk contrary to what in his heart he knows to be right and true. This
constitutes his freedom, his agency, and it is because of this fact
that he is morally responsible for his conduct.

I have nowhere else found a statement of the facts involved in free
agency so clearly set forth as in Guizot's "History of Civilization,"
from which I summarize the following:

    1. _Power of Deliberation_--The mind is conscious of a power of
    deliberation. Before the intellect passes the different motives
    of action, interests, passions, opinions, etc. The intellect
    considers, compares, estimates, and finally judges them. This is a
    preparatory work which precedes the act of will.

    2. _Liberty, Free Agency or Will_--When deliberation has taken
    place--when man has taken full cognizance of the motives which
    present themselves to him, he takes a resolution, of which he looks
    upon himself as the author, which arises because he wishes it and
    which would not arise unless he did wish it--here the fact of
    agency is shown; it resides in the resolution which man makes after
    deliberation; it is the resolution which is the proper act of man,
    which subsists by him alone; a simple fact independent of all the
    facts which precede it or surround it.

    3. _Free Will, or Agency Modified_--At the same time that man
    feels himself free, he recognizes the fact that his freedom is not
    arbitrary, that it is placed under the dominion of a law which will
    preside over it and influence it. What that law is will depend upon
    the education of each individual, upon his surroundings, etc. To
    act in harmony with that law is what man recognizes as his duty; it
    will be the task of his liberty. He will soon see, however, that he
    never fully acquits himself of his task, never acts in full harmony
    with his moral law. Morally capable of conforming himself to his
    law, he falls short of doing it. He does not accomplish all that he
    ought, nor all that he can. This fact is evident, one of which all
    may give witness; and it often happens that the best men, that is,
    those who have best conformed their will to reason, have often been
    the most struck with their insufficience.

    4. _Necessity of External Assistance_--This weakness in man leads
    him to feel the necessity of an external support to operate as
    a fulcrum for the human will, a power that may be added to its
    present power and sustain it at need. Man seeks this fulcrum on
    all sides; he demands it in the encouragement of friends, in the
    councils of the wise; but as the visible world, the human society,
    do not always answer to his desires, the soul goes beyond the
    visible world, above human relations, to seek this fulcrum of which
    it has need. Hence the religious sentiment develops itself; man
    addresses himself to God, and invokes his aid through prayer.

    5. _Man Finds the Help He Seeks_--Such is the nature of man that
    when he sincerely asks this support he obtains it; that is, seeking
    it is almost sufficient to secure it. Whosoever, feeling his will
    weak, invokes the encouragement of a friend, the influence of wise
    councils, the support of public opinion, or who addresses himself
    to God by prayer, soon feels his will fortified in a certain
    measure and for a certain time.

    6. _Influence of the Spiritual World on Liberty_--There are
    spiritual influences at work on man--the empire of the spiritual
    world upon liberty. There are certain changes, certain moral events
    which manifest themselves in man without his being able to refer
    their origin to an act of his will, or being able to recognize the
    author. Certain facts occur in the interior of the human soul which
    it does not refer to itself, which it does not recognize as the
    work of its own will. There are certain days, certain moments in
    which it finds itself in a different moral state from that which
    it was last conscious of under the operations of its own will. In
    other words, the moral man does not wholly create himself; he is
    conscious that causes, that powers external to himself, act upon
    and modify him imperceptibly--this fact has been called the grace
    of God, which helps the will of man.

After giving full weight to all the facts here set forth--and certainly
each one enters as a factor into the question of man's freedom--the
Book of Mormon doctrine stands true. There is such a quality of man's
mind. He is conscious of it. Conscious of the power of deliberation;
conscious of the existence of moral obligation pressing upon him;
conscious of his own weakness that makes him feel unable to rise to
the high level of his full duty; conscious of his need of external
assistance; conscious of his will being made stronger by appealing
to the counsel of his friends, and appealing to God for help through
prayer; conscious of the fact that he is in different states of moral
feeling at different times, owing, doubtless, to this appeal that he
makes to external aids--yet, in the last analysis of it all, he remains
conscious of the fact that what he does, not only can be, but is, a
self-determining act, and he remains conscious of the power that he
could do otherwise if he would. This consciousness and this freedom
are the most stupendous facts in human existence, and upon their
reality--upon their truth--depends all the glory of that existence.
Arriving here the outlook concerning man's possibilities for the future
is immense. Sir Oliver Lodge speaking of man, after arriving at this
point in his development, the attainment of consciousness and free
will, recently said:

    On this planet man is the highest outcome of the process so far (i.
    e., the process of development), and is, therefore, the highest
    representation of Deity that here exists. Terribly imperfect as
    yet, because so recently evolved, he is nevertheless a being which
    has at length attained to consciousness and free-will, a being
    unable to be coerced by the whole force of the universe, against
    his will; a spark of the divine Spirit, therefore, never more to be
    quenched. Open still to awful horrors, to agonies of remorse, but
    to floods of joy also, he persists, and his destiny is largely in
    his own hands; he may proceed up or down, he may advance towards
    a magnificent ascendency, he may recede towards depths of infamy.
    He is not coerced: he is guided and influenced, but he is free to
    choose. The evil and the good are necessary correlatives; freedom
    to choose the one involves freedom to choose the other. [46]

This is the doctrine then of the Book of Mormon: the existence in
man as a quality of his mind or spirit freedom and power to will, to
determine for himself his course. He may choose good or evil. The
freedom of righteousness, or the bondage of sin. If man finds his will
strengthened in favor of choosing the good by appealing for help to
external aids, to God through prayer, and that help comes in the form
of the grace of God, and becomes a factor in helping man into a state
of righteousness, it should be remembered that the act of appealing for
external help was the exercise of man's free agency. He willed to do
good and sought help to carry out his determination; and the assistance
of the grace of God so obtained in no way operates to destroy the
freedom of man's will. In concluding this subject, it may be said that
the Book of Mormon in an authoritative way settles conclusively the
great theological question of the free agency of man.

W. H. Mallack, in his work on "The Reconstruction of Religious Belief"
(1905), has a most fascinating chapter on human freedom [47] in
which he illustrates on broad lines the universal though unconscious
assumption of the fact of human freedom in both literature and history.
Of the characters created by the great poets, he remarks: "They
interest us as born to freedom, and not naturally slaves, and they pass
before us like kings in a Roman triumph. Once let us suppose these
characters to be mere puppets of heredity and circumstance, and they and
the works that deal with them lose all intelligible content, and we
find ourselves confused and wearied with the fury of an idiot's tale."
On the criticism of historical characters he says: "All this praising
and blaming is based on the assumption that the person praised or
blamed is the originator of his own actions, and not a mere transmitter
of forces." And further, all debating on the value of historical
characters would be meaningless, "if it were not for the inveterate
belief that a man's significance for men resides primarily in what he
makes of himself, not in what he has been made by an organism derived
from his parents, and the various external stimuli to which it has
automatically responded." Our author also points out the truth that
forgiveness itself among men (and he might well have extended his
argument to the forgiveness God imparts to men also) assumes the fact
of human freedom--else what is there to be forgiven! The believer in
freedom says to the offending party, "I forgive you for the offense of
not having done your best." The assumption is that the offender could
have refrained from giving one offense--he had freedom and power to
have done otherwise. One not believing in human freedom would say to
the offending party: "I neither forgive nor blame you; for, although
you have done your worst, your worst was your best also" & having
no freedom, he was under no obligation; his action was indifferent,
neither good nor bad; there was no blame or praise possible; he is
neither a subject for mercy nor justice to act upon.

In the course of the discussion to which attention is called, our
author has contributed an idea worthy of all acceptation and is
valuable for the reason that it goes outside the beaten paths followed
in the free will controversy: "When most people talk of believing in
moral freedom, they mean by freedom a power which exhausts itself in
acts of choice between a series of alternative courses; but, important
though such choice, as a function of freedom is, the root idea of
freedom lies deeper still. It consists in the idea, not that a man is,
as a personality, the first and the sole cause of his choice between
alternative courses, but that he is, in a true, even if in a qualified
sense, the first cause of what he does, or feels, or is, whether
this involves an act of choice, or consists of an unimpeded impulse.
Freedom of choice between alternatives is the consequence of this
primary faculty. It is the form in which the faculty is most noticeably
manifested; but it is not the primary faculty of personal freedom

I believe this fact in relation to man's freedom; that it is a quality
capable of manifesting itself in other modes than choice between
alternatives; that it may project an unimpeded line of conduct, and yet
in this world its chief manifestations are in a choice between things
opposite and we shall see later, according to the Book of Mormon,
that conditions in this world are so ordained in the existence of
opposites--antinomies--that man may exercise this quality of freedom in
the choice of alternatives.


_The Atonement._

After giving an account of the fall of man, substantially as found in
Genesis, the Nephite prophet Alma, is represented in the Book of Mormon
as teaching his son Corianton the doctrine of the atonement, as follows:

    ###_Alma's Doctrine of Atonement_.

    And now we see by this, that our first parents were cut off, both
    temporally and spiritually, from the presence of the Lord; and thus
    we see they became subjects to follow after their own will.

    Now, behold, it was not expedient that man should be reclaimed
    from this temporal death, for that would destroy the great plan of

    Therefore, as the soul could never die, and the fall had brought
    upon all mankind a spiritual death as well as a temporal; that is,
    they were cut off from the presence of the Lord, it was expedient
    that mankind should be reclaimed from this spiritual death;

    Therefore, as they had become carnal, sensual, and devilish, by
    nature, this probationary state became a state for them [in which]
    to prepare; it became a preparatory state.

    And now remember, my son, if it were not for the plan of redemption
    (laying it aside), as soon as they were dead, their souls were
    miserable, being cut off from the presence of the Lord.

    And now there was no means to reclaim men from this fallen state
    which man had brought upon himself, because of his own disobedience;

    Therefore, according to justice, the plan of redemption could not
    be brought about, only on conditions, of repentance of men in this
    probationary state; yea, this preparatory state; for except it were
    for these conditions, mercy could not take effect except it should
    destroy the work of justice. Now the work of justice could not be
    destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God.

    And thus we see that all mankind were fallen, and they were in the
    grasp of justice; yea, the justice of God, which consigned them
    forever to be cut off from his presence.

    And now the plan of mercy could not be brought about, except an
    atonement should be made; therefore God himself atoneth for the
    sins of the world, to bring about the plan of mercy, to appease the
    demands of justice, that God might be a perfect, just God, and a
    merciful God also.

    Now repentance could not come unto men, except there were a
    punishment, which also was eternal as the life of the soul should
    be, affixed opposite to the plan of happiness, which was as eternal
    also as the life of the soul.

    Now, how could a man repent, except he should sin? How could he
    sin, if there was no law, how could there be a law, save there was
    a punishment?

    Now there was a punishment affixed, and a just law given, which
    brought remorse of conscience unto man.

    Now, if there was no law given--if a man murdered he should die,
    would he be afraid he would die if he should murder?

    And also, if there was no law given against sin, men would not be
    afraid to sin.

    And if there was no law given if men sinned, what could justice do,
    or mercy either; for they would have no claim upon the creature?

    But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a
    repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise
    justice claimeth the creature, and executeth the law, and the law
    inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be
    destroyed, and God would cease to be God.

    But God ceaseth not to be God, and mercy claimeth the penitent, and
    mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth
    to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the
    dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are
    restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works;
    according to the law and justice;

    For, behold, justice exerciseth all his demands, and also mercy
    claimeth all which is her own; and thus, none but the truly
    penitent are saved.

    What! do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you,
    nay! Not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God.

    And thus God bringeth about his great and eternal purposes, which
    were prepared from the foundation of the world. And thus cometh
    about the salvation and the redemption of men, and also their
    destruction and misery;

    Therefore, O my son, whosoever will come, may come, and partake of
    the waters of life freely; and whosoever will not come, the same is
    not compelled to come; but in the last day, it shall be restored
    unto him, according to his deeds. [48]

Summarizing the foregoing we have the following as the result: The
effect of Adam's transgression was to destroy the harmony of things
in this world. As a consequence of his fall man is banished from the
presence of God--a spiritual death takes place and man becomes sensual,
devilish, unholy, is cursed, we say, with a strong inclination to
sinfulness. Man is also made subject to a temporal death, a separation
of the spirit and body. Much might have been gained by this union of
his spirit with his body of flesh and bone could it have been immortal,
but that is now lost, by this temporal death, this separation of
spirit and body. These conditions would have remained eternally fixed
as the result of the operation of law--inexorable law, called "the
justice of God," admitting of nothing else; for the law was given to
eternal beings and by them violated, and man is left in the grasp of
eternal justice, with all its consequences upon his head and the head
of his progeny. And the justice of the law admitted the conditions,
admitted that the penalties affixed should be effective, but this is
justice--stern, unrelenting justice; justice untempered by mercy.
But mercy must in some way be made to reach man, yet in a way also
that will not destroy justice; for justice must be maintained, else
all is confusion--ruin. If justice be destroyed--if justice be not
maintained--. "God will cease to be God." Hence mercy may not be
introduced into the divine economy of this world without a vindication
of the broken law by some means or other, for divine laws as well as
human ones are mere nullities if their penalties be not in force.

The penalty of the law then, transgressed by Adam, must be executed,
or else an adequate atonement must be made for man's transgression.
This the work of the Christ. He makes the atonement. He comes to earth
and assumes responsibility for this transgression of law, and gathers
up into his own soul all the suffering due to the transgression of
the law by Adam. All the suffering due to individual transgression of
law--the direct consequences of the original transgression--from Adam
to the end of the world. The burden of us all is laid upon him. He
will bear our griefs and carry our sorrows. He will be wounded for our
transgressions, and be bruised for our iniquities. The chastisement of
our peace will be upon him; on him is laid the iniquity of us all; by
his stripes shall we be healed. [49] That is to say, having gathered
into himself all the suffering and sorrows due to all the sinning that
shall be in the world, he is able to dictate the terms upon which man
may lay hold of mercy--by which mercy may heal his wounds--and these
terms he names in the conditions of the gospel, the acceptance of which
brings complete redemption. The Christ brings to pass the resurrection
of the dead. The spirit and the body are eternally re-united; the
temporal death--one of the effects of Adam's trangression--is overcome.
There is no more physical death; the "soul" [50]--the eternally united
spirit and body are now to be immortal as spirit alone before was
immortal. The man so immortal is brought back into the presence of God,
and if he has accepted the terms of the gospel by which he is redeemed
from the effects of his own, as well as from Adam's transgression, his
spiritual death is ended, and henceforth he may be spiritually immortal
as well as physically immortal--eternally with God in an atmosphere of
righteousness--the spiritual death is overcome.

Such I make out to be the Book of Mormon doctrine of the atonement, and
the redemption of man through the gospel.


__The Doctrine of Opposite Existences_._

Closely connected with the doctrine of the agency of man, the purpose
of his existence and his redemption from the fallen state, is what I
shall call the Book of Mormon doctrine of "opposite existences," what
the scholastics would call "antinomies." The doctrine as stated in
the Book of Mormon--the time of its publication--1830--remembered,
especially when taken in connection with the consequences it supposes
in the event of abolishing the existence of evil, is strikingly
original and philosophically profound; and reaches a depth of thought
beyond all that could be imagined as possible with Joseph Smith or any
of those associated with him in bringing forth the Book of Mormon.

The statement of the doctrine in question occurs in a discourse of
Lehi's on the subject of the atonement. The aged prophet represents
happiness or misery as growing out of the acceptance or rejection of
the atonement of the Christ, and adds that the misery consequent upon
its rejection is in opposition to the happiness which is affixed to its

    For it must needs be [he continues] that there is an opposition
    in all things. If [it were] not so * * * righteousness could not
    be brought to pass; neither wickedness; neither holiness nor
    misery; neither good nor bad. Wherefore [that is, if this fact
    of opposites did not exist] all things must needs be a compound
    in one; wherefore, if it [the sum of things] should be one body,
    it must needs remain as dead, having no life, neither death, nor
    corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense
    nor insensibility. Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a
    thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the
    end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing [i. e., the absence of
    opposite existences which Lehi is supposing] must needs destroy the
    wisdom of God, and his eternal purposes; and also the power, and
    the mercy, and the justice of God. [51]

The inspired man even goes beyond this, and makes existences themselves
depend upon this law of opposites:

    And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no
    sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is
    no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness, there is no
    happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness, there
    be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is
    no God. And if there is no God, we are not, neither the earth: for
    there could have been no creation of things; neither to act nor to
    be acted upon, wherefore, all things must have vanished away. [52]

This may be regarded as a very bold setting forth of the doctrine of
antinomies, and yet I think the logic of it, and the inevitableness of
the conclusion unassailable. In his work, "Origin and Development of
Religious Beliefs" S. Baring-Gould says:

    The world presents us with a picture of unity and distinction;
    unity without uniformity, and distinction without antagonism. * * *
    Everywhere, around us and within us, we see that radical antinomy.
    The whole astronomic order resolves itself into attraction and
    repulsion--a centripetal and a centrifugal force; the chemical
    order into the antinomy of positive and negative electricity,
    decomposing substances and recomposing them. The whole visible
    universe presents the antinomy of light and darkness, movement and
    repose, force and matter, heat and cold, the one and the multiple.
    The order of life is resumed in the antinomy of the individual
    and the species, the particular and the general; the order of our
    sentiments in that of happiness and sorrow, pleasure and pain; that
    of our conceptions in the antinomy of the ideal and the real; that
    of our will in the conditions of activity and passivity. [53]

The existence of evil in the world has ever been a vexed problem
for both theologians and philosophers, and has led to the wildest
speculations imaginable. It will be sufficient here, however, if I
note the recognition by high authority of the difficulties involved in
the problem. Of those who have felt and expressed these difficulties,
I know of no one who has done so in better terms than Henry L. Mansel
in his contribution to the celebrated course of "Bampton Lecturers,"
in "The Limits of Religious Thought" (1858), in the course of which he

    The real riddle of existence--the problem which confounds all
    philosophy, aye, and all religion, too, so far as religion is a
    thing of man's reason, is the fact that evil exists at all; not
    that it exists for a longer or a shorter duration. Is not God
    infinitely wise and holy and powerful now? and does not sin exist
    along with that infinite holiness and wisdom and power? Is God to
    become more holy, more wise, more powerful hereafter; and must evil
    be annihilated to make room for his perfections to expand? Does the
    infinity of his eternal nature ebb and flow with every increase
    or diminution in the sum of human guilt and misery? Against this
    immovable barrier of the existence of evil, the waves of philosophy
    have dashed themselves unceasingly since the birthday of human
    thought, and have retired broken and powerless, without displacing
    the minutest fragment of the stubborn rock, without softening one
    feature of its dark and rugged surface. [54]

This writer then proceeds by plain implication to make it clear
that religion no more than philosophy has solved the problem of the
existence of evil:

    But this mystery [i. e., the existence of evil], vast and
    inscrutable as it is, is but one aspect of a more general
    problem; it is but the moral form of the ever-recurring secret
    of the Infinite. How the Infinite and the finite, in any form of
    antagonism or other relation, can exist together; how infinite
    power can coexist with finite activity; how infinite wisdom can
    coexist with finite contingency; how infinite goodnesss can coexist
    with finite evil; how the Infinite can exist in any manner without
    exhausting the universe of reality--this is the riddle which
    Infinite Wisdom alone can solve, the problem whose very conception
    belongs only to that Universal Knowledge which fills and embraces
    the Universe of Being. [55]

In the presence of these reflections it cannot be doubted, then, that
the existence of moral evil is one of the world's serious difficulties;
and any solution which the Book of Mormon may give of it that is really
helpful, will be a valuable contribution to the world's enlightenment,
a real revelation--a ray of light from the "inner fact of things." Let
us consider if it does this.

In view of the utterances of the Book of Mormon already quoted I am
justified in saying that evil as well as good is among the eternal
things. Its existence did not begin with its appearance on our earth.
Evil existed even in heaven; for Lucifer and many other spirits sinned
there; "rebelled against heaven's matchless King," waged war, and were
thrust out into the earth for their transgression. [56]

Evil is not a created quality. [57] It has always existed as the
back ground of good. It is as eternal as goodnesss; it is as eternal
as law; it is as eternal as the agency of intelligence. Sin, which
is evil active, is transgression of law; [58] and so long as the
agency of intelligences and law have existed, the possibility of the
transgression of law has existed; and as the agency of intelligences
and law have eternally existed, so, too, evil has existed eternally,
either potentially or active and will always so exist.

Evil may not be referred to God for its origin. He is not its creator,
it is one of those independent existences that is _uncreate_, and
stands in the category of qualities of eternal things. While not
prepared to accept the doctrine of some philosophers that "good and
evil are two sides of one thing." [59] I am prepared to believe
that evil is a necessary antithesis to good, and essential to the
realization of the harmony of the universe. "The good cannot exist
without the antithesis of the evil--the foil on which it produces
itself and becomes known." [60] As remarked by Orlando J. Smith, "Evil
exists in the balance of natural forces. * * * * * * It is also the
background of good, the incentive to good, and the trial of good,
without which good could not be. As the virtue of courage could not
exist without the evil of danger, and as the virtue of sympathy could
not exist without the evil of suffering, so no other virtue could
exist without its corresponding evil. In a world without evil--if such
a world be really conceivable, all men would have perfect health,
perfect intelligence, and perfect morals. No one could gain or impart
information, each one's cup of knowledge being full. The temperature
would stand forever at seventy degrees, both heat and cold being
evil. There could be no progress, since progress is the _overcoming
of evil_. A world without evil would be as toil without exertion, as
light without darkness, as a battle with no antagonist. It would be a
world without meaning." [61] Or, as Lehi puts it, in still stronger
terms--after describing what conditions would be without the existence
of opposites:--

    Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore,
    if it [i. e. the sum of things] should be one body [i. e.,
    of one character--so called good without evil] it must needs
    remain as dead, having no life, neither death, nor corruption,
    nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor
    insensibility. Wherefore, it [the sum of things] must needs have
    been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been
    no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing [the
    absence of opposites] must needs destroy the wisdom of God, and
    his eternal purposes; and also, the power, and the mercy, and the
    justice of God. [62]

As there can be no good without the antinomy of evil, so there can be
no evil without its antinomy, or antithesis--good. The existence of one
implies the existence of the other; and, conversely, the non-existence
of the latter would imply the non-existence of the former. It is from
this basis that Lehi reached the conclusion that either his doctrine of
antinomies, or the existence of opposites, is true, or else there are
no existences. That is to say--to use his own words--

    If ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no
    sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is
    no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness, there be no
    happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness, there
    be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not, there is
    no God, and if there is no God, we are not, neither the earth; for
    there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to
    be acted upon: wherefore, all things must have vanished away. [63]

But as things have not vanished away, as there are real existences,
the whole series of things for which he contends are verities. "For
there is a God," he declares, "and he hath created all things, both the
heavens and the earth, and all things that in them is; both things to
act, and things to be acted upon." [64]

After arriving at this conclusion, Lehi, proceeding from the general to
the particular, deals with the introduction of this universal antinomy
into our world as follows:

    To bring about his [God's] eternal purposes in the end of man,
    after he had created our first parents * * * it must needs be that
    there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition
    to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter;
    Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for
    himself. Wherefore man could not act for himself, save it should
    be that he was enticed by the one or the other. [65] And I, Lehi,
    according to the things which I have read, must needs suppose that
    an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen
    from heaven; wherefore he became a devil, having sought that which
    was evil before God. And because he had fallen from heaven, and
    had become miserable forever, he said unto Eve, yea, even that old
    serpent, who is the devil, who is the father of all lies; wherefore
    he said, Partake of the forbidden fruit, and ye shall not die, but
    ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. And after Adam and Eve
    had partaken of the forbidden fruit they were driven out of the
    garden of Eden, to till the earth. And they have brought forth
    children; yea, even the family of all the earth.

Then follows Lehi's treatise upon the reason for the fall, the purpose
of man's existence, which have already been noticed.

Summary of the Foregoing Doctrines.

This then is the order of things--(though in this summary the order
in which the various doctrines have been presented is not strictly
followed, but one more in harmony with the proper order of the related
things; but which order could not well be set forth until the foregoing
discussion of them was had):--

1. The intelligent "Ego" in man, which we have called an
"Intelligence," meaning, however, not a quality but the "Ego" itself,
is an eternal entity; uncreate and uncreatable--an essential, a
necessary, self-existent being.

2. These "Intelligences" the begotten of God, spirits; so that men are
of the same race with God, are of the same "essence" or "substance,"
and are the sons of God by virtue of an actual relationship.

3. There came a time in the course of the existence of these spiritual
personages when an earth-existence, a union of the spiritual personage
with a body of flesh and bone, became necessary for his further
development, for his enlargement; an existence where good and evil were
in actual conflict, where the mighty and perhaps awful lessons which
such conditions have to teach could be learned.

4. There are eternal opposites in existences, light--darkness;
joy--sorrow; pleasure--pain; sweet--bitter; good--evil; and so
following. Evil is an eternal existence, the necessary co-relative of
the good, uncreate and may not be referred to God for its origin.

5. The spirits of men came to earth primarily to obtain bodies through
which their spirits may act through all eternity. They came to effect a
union of spirit and element essential to all their future development
and their joy and their glory; [66] secondly they came to obtain such
experiences as this earth-life has to give--to be taught by the things
which they suffer; learning the lessons that sorrow and sin and death
have to teach, finding both the strength and weakness of their own
natures--proving the fidelity, valor and honor of their own spirits;
making proof of their worthiness for that exceeding great and eternal
weight of glory which God has designed for those who overcome and in
all things prove faithful.

6. To lead the way in this great work, one sufficiently developed for
such a task--Adam--is appointed to come to earth to open the series
of dispensations designed of God for man in his earth-probation. He
introduced those changes in the harmony of things necessary to the
accomplishment of the purposes of God in the earth-life of man--he fell
that man might be; and not only "be," but have that being, under the
very conditions that have since prevailed.

7. Evil was introduced into this world through the transgression of
Adam, and man falls under the censure of eternal and inexorable justice.

8. Through the Atonement of Christ, however, man is freed from the
effects of Adam's trangression. The resurrection redeems him from
the temporal death--the separation of the spirit and body, and he is
brought back into the presence of God.

9. Through the Atonement of Christ mercy also has been brought into
the world's moral economy; and, as well as justice, operates upon
man. God's righteous law has been given to man. Man is a free moral
agent and may choose to obey the law, or may choose to follow after
wickedness. If he choose the latter, he falls under the justice of the

10. Through the Atonement the privilege of repentance is granted,
and mercy claims the truly penitent, rescuing him from the otherwise
inexhorable claims of the law, and setting him in the way of salvation
through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel.

Such, in brief is the outline of the gospel of Christ in the Book of
Mormon so far as it relates to the nature and eternal existence of
man, the purpose of his earth-existence, the fall, the atonement, the
existence of good and evil, and the development that shall come of
contact with these forces.

In concluding this chapter, apart from the matter of originality in
the doctrines set forth, which originality, be it remembered is one of
the evidences here sought to be established as a sort of proof for the
divinity of the book, I desire to call attention to another argument
which these doctrines are capable of bearing; namely the nature of
the doctrines themselves, the order in which they are set forth, and
their deep philosophical character; and to the candid reader I submit
this question: Was the unaided native intelligence of Joseph Smith, or
the intelligence or learning of any of those associated with him in
bringing forth the Book of Mormon, equal to the task of formulating
the principles of moral philosophy and theology that are found in that
book and discussed in this chapter? Was the intelligence or learning of
Solomon Spaulding, or any other person to whom the origin of the book
is ascribed, equal to such a task? There can be but one answer to that
question, and the nature of it is obvious.

Beyond controversy neither the native intelligence nor learning of
Joseph Smith can possibly be regarded as equal to such a performance
as bringing forth the knowledge which the Book of Mormon imparts upon
these profound subjects; nor can the intelligence or learning of those
who assisted him in translating the book be regarded as sufficient
for such a task. Nor was the intelligence and learning of any one
to whom the origin of the book has ever been ascribed equal to such
an achievement. Indeed the book sounds depths on these subjects not
only beyond the intelligence and learning of this small group of men
referred to, but beyond the intelligence and learning of the age
itself in which it came forth. Therefore it is useless to ascribe
the knowledge it imparts on these subjects to human intelligence or
learning at all. What is said by it on these subjects, so full of
interest to mankind, is a word truly from the "inner fact of things"--a
message written by ancient prophets of America inspired of God to bear
witness to the truth of these great things which it most concerns man
to know.


1. Genesis iii.

2. I. Cor. xv: 21, 22; Romans v: 12-17.

3. Westminster Confession, chapter iv--of Creation--Section i.

4. In proof of this last declaration the expounder cites Col. i: 16:
"All things were created by him [Christ] and for him."

Also Proverbs xvi: 4: 'The Lord hath made all things for himself; yea,
even the wicked for the day of evil.'

Also Rev. iv: 11: "For thou [the Lord] hast created all things, and
for thy pleasure they are and were created;" and Rom. xi: 36: "For of
him, and through him, and to him are all things." See Commentary on
the "Confession of Faith," with questions for theological students and
Bible classes, by the Reverend A. A. Hodge, D. D., Chapter iv. The
reading of the passages will convince any one that if this is all the
scripture proof that may be adduced in the way of an explanation of the
purposes of God in creation, that what I have said in the text, that
there is no direct, explicit, and adequate statement of the object of
man's existence in holy writ is sufficiently vindicated.

5. Commentary on the Confession (Hodge), chapter iv.

6. Douay Catechism, chapter iii.

7. Ibid.

8. Gen. ii: 25.

9. Ibid iii: 7.

10. "Adam was not deceived, but the woman, being deceived, was in the
transgression."--Tim. ii: 14.

11. Catholic Belief, p. 6. (Joseph Faa Di Bruno is the author.)

12. Catholic Belief, p. 330.

13. Douay Catechism, p. 13.

14. Buck's Theological Dictionary, p. 182.

15. Old Testament History (William Smith, LL. D.), chapter ii.

16. Westminster Confession, chapter vi, section 1.

17. Commentary on the Confession of Faith (A. A. Hodge), pp. 105-108.

18. Paine's Theological Works, "Age of Reason," p. 12.

19. See Ingersoll's Lectures, "Liberty of Man, Woman and Child," where
the great orator, contrasts the story of the Fall given in the Bible
with that of Brahma in the Hindoo mythology, and extravagantly praises
the latter to the disparagement of the former.

20. See "A Short View of Great Questions" (Orlando J. Smith), chapter
10; also his work on "Eternalism."

21. John viii: 58.

22. John xvii.

23. Job xxxiii: 4-7.

24. Revelation xii.

25. Jude vi.

26. Jeremiah i: 5.

27. Heb. xii.

28. Those who wish to extend their investigation on the subject are
referred to the author's work on "The Gospel," especially the section
of Man's Relationship to Deity, found in both the second and third

29. Ether iii.

30. John i: 2-14.

31. Doc. & Cov., section xciii.

32. I use the term "begotten" instead of "create" advisedly. I do
not believe the spirit of man is "created" by God; I believe it is
"begotten" of him, and in addition to its own native, underived
inherent qualities, partakes also somewhat of the qualities or nature
of him who begets it, hence an intelligence begotten of a spirit is a
son of God by being begotten by a divine parent; by the nature of it
also, since somewhat of the nature of the parent has been imparted to
it. The distinction between a "created" thing and a being begotten is
thus very clearly set forth by the Christian Father Athanasius: Let it
be repeated that a created thing is external to the nature of the being
who creates; but a generation (a begetting, as a Father begets a son)
is the proper offspring of the nature. (Footnote, Shedd's "History of
Christian Doctrine," Vol. I, p. 322.)

33. Luke iii: 38.

34. Alma xiii: 9.

35. Alma xi.

36. Alma xi: 9.

37. Rev. viii: 80. What means the scripture here: "The Lamb slain from
the foundations of the world"--if it does not mean that the Savior's
mission and work of atonement, and the mode of it, were known before
the foundation of the world?

38. "Hedonism is the form of eudemonism that regards pleasure (including
avoidance of pain) as the only conceivable object in life, and teaches
that as between the lower pleasures of sense and the higher enjoyments
of reason, or satisfied self-respect, there is no difference except
in degree, duration, and hedonic value of the experience, there being
in strictness, no such thing as ethical or moral value."--Standard

39. In Cicero's description of the Epicurean conception of the gods
he says: "That which is truly happy cannot be burdened with any
labor itself, nor can it impose any labor on another, nor can it be
influenced by resentment or favor, because things which are liable to
such failings must be weak and frail. * * * Their life [i. e., of the
gods] is most happy and the most abounding with all kinds of blessings
which can be conceived. They do nothing. They are embarrassed with no
business; nor do they perform any work. They rejoice in the possession
of their own wisdom and virtue. They are satisfied that they shall ever
enjoy the fulness of eternal pleasure. * * * Nothing can be happy that
is not at ease." (Tusculan Disputations, The Nature of the Gods.)

40. II. Nephi ii: 23.

41. I. John iii: 4.

42. Pearl of Great Price, Book of Moses, ch. i: 39.

43. Or "the soul;" for, in the revelations of God in this last
dispensation, the spirit and the body are called the "soul."
"Through the redemption which is made for you is brought to pass the
resurrection from the dead. And the spirit and the body is the soul of
man. And the resurrection from the dead is the redemption of the soul."
(Doc. & Cov. Sec. 88: 14-16.)

44. Alma xxix: 4.

45. II. Nephi. ii: 27.

46. Hibbert Journal, April, 1906, p. 656.

47. Chapter iv.

48. Alma 42. The same subject is treated in II. Nephi ii.

49. Isaiah liii.

50. Doc. & Cov., Sec. xxxviii: 15.

51. II. Nephi ii. It is a pleasure to note that this process of
reasoning, remarkable as it is, and startling as it is in its
conclusion, is in harmony with modern thought. Mr. Lester F. Ward,
whose works I have already quoted in this chapter, by a closely
analogous order of reasoning, reaches the same conclusion. This the
passage: "The pleasure of 'doing good' is among the most delicious
of which the human faculties are capable, and becomes the permanent
stimulus to thousands of worthy lives. It is usually looked upon as
the highest of all motives, and by some as the ultimate goal toward
which all action should aspire. It should first be observed that the
very act of doing good presupposes evil, i. e., pain. Doing good is
necessarily either increasing pleasure or diminishing pain. Now, if all
devoted themselves to doing good, it is maintained that the sufferings
of the world would be chiefly abolished. Admitting that there are
some evils that no human efforts could remove, and supposing that by
united altruism all removable evils were done away, there would be
nothing left for altruists to do. By their own acts they would have
deprived themselves of a calling. They must be miserable since the
only enjoyment they deemed worthy of experiencing could be no longer
possible, and this suffering from ennui would be among those which
lie beyond human power to alleviate. An altruistic act would then
alone consist in inflicting pain on one's self for the sole purpose
of affording others an opportunity to derive pleasure from the act of
relieving it. I do not put the matter in this light for the purpose
of discouraging altruism, but simply to show how short sighted most
ethical reasoning is."

52. II. Nephi ii.

53. "Origin and Development of Religious Belief," Vol. II., pp. 22, 23.

54. Limits of Religious Thought, Mansel, p. 197.

55. Ibid. pp. 197-8.

56. See Rev. xii: 7. Jude 6.

57. Lest some text-proofer should retort upon me and cite the words
of Isaiah--"I make peace and create evil"--the only text of scripture
ascribing the creation of evil to God--I will anticipate so far as to
say that it is quite generally agreed that no reference is made in
the words of Isaiah to "moral evil;" but to such evils as may come
as judgments upon people for their correction, such as famine or
tempest or war; such an "evil" as would stand in natural antithesis to
"peace," which word precedes, "I create evil," in the text--"I make
peace and create"--the opposite to peace, "The evil of afflictions
and punishments, but not the evil of sin" (Catholic Comment on Isaiah
45:7). Meantime we have the clearest scriptural evidence that moral
evil is not a product of God's: "Let no man say when he is tempted,
I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither
tempteth he any man." That is to say, God has nothing to do with the
creation of moral evil; "But every man is tempted when he is drawn
away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived,
it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth
death." (James i: 13-15). "The evil and the good are necessary
co-relatives." (Sir Oliver Lodge in Hibbert Journal, April, 1906, p.

58. I. John iii: 4.

59. Eternalism, Orlando J. Smith, p. 205-6.

60. Scotus Erigena, quoted by Neander, "Hist. Christian Religion and
Church," Vol. III. p. 465.

61. Eternalism, pp. 30, 31.

62. II. Nephi ii: 11.

63. II. Nephi ii: 13.

64. Ibid. ii: 14.

65. On such a proposition Dr. Jacob Cooper, of Rutgers College, at
the head of an article on "Theodicy" (the justification of the divine
providence by the attempt to reconcile the existence of evil with the
goodnesss and sovereignty of God), says (August, 1903), "There must be
an alternative to any line of conduct, in order to give it a moral
quality. We have to deal with, not an imaginary, but a real world; not
with a state of things wholly different from those by which character
is developed. If there are to be such qualities as righteousness,
virtue, merit, as the result of good action, there must be a condition
by which these things are possible. And this can only be where there
is an alternative which may be embraced by a free choice. If the
work of man on earth is to build up character, if his experience is
disciplinary, by which he constantly becomes better fitted for greater
good and a wider sphere of action, then he must have the responsibility
of choosing for himself a course different from one which appeals to
the lower qualities in his nature."

66. Doc. & Cov., Sec. xciii: 33, 35.



I have already, in volume one of the New Witnesses, called attention
to the value of fulfilled prophecies as evidence of a prophet's being
divinely commissioned with a message to the world. [1] It is there
pointed out that fulfilled prophecy has ever been regarded as a species
of miracle; that the Lord himself refers to it as a test by which true
prophets may be distinguished from false ones; that, therefore, the
power to foresee and foretell future events is a power that God has
reserved to himself and to those whom he especially inspires--hence
the power of prophecy is the surest sign of divine inspiration--of
divine authority. [2] Consequently it is only necessary here to say that
such evidence is equally strong in support of a book claiming a divine
origin; provided, of course, that it contains prophecies by which it
may be tested. The Book of Mormon contains such prophecies. Here it
is necessary to explain, however, that many of the prophetic parts of
the Book of Mormon are not available as such a test, for the reason
that very many of its prophecies relate to matters that had their
fulfillment in ancient times. For example: the Jaredites, who preceded
the Nephites in occupying North America, were told by their prophets
that except they repented the Lord would bring another people, as he
had their fathers, to occupy the land in their stead. The Jaredites
did not repent; and in due time the colony of Lehi was brought to
America much as the original Jaredite colony had been; and thus the
prophecy was fulfilled; but such is the nature of the prophecy and its
fulfillment that it affords us no means by which we can test the divine
inspiration of the book containing it, the prediction and the account
of its fulfillment being found within the book itself; and we are in
possession of no outside means independent of the Book of Mormon by
which to test this prophecy or its fulfillment. Of like nature is the
prediction that Ether made to Coriantumr, to the effect that except he
repented his people should be destroyed and he alone should survive
them, but only to see another people come upon the goodly land to
possess it. [3] All this came to pass in due time [4]--since Coriantumr
did not repent; but this affords us no means by which we may test the
prophetic claims of the book containing such a prophecy, because both
prophecy and the account of its fulfillment are within the book itself.
So also with the prediction concerning the advent of the Messiah on
the American continent; the signs at his birth and death and his
ministry, all of which events were foretold in great clearness to the
Nephites; but these like the other prophecies alluded to, are of such
a nature that they afford us no means of testing the prophetic claims
of the book. Only those prophecies in the Book of Mormon which have
had their fulfillment since the book was published, or that are yet to
be fulfilled, are available--at least they are the only ones that will
appeal to unbelievers--as evidence of the book's claims to a divine
authenticity. Of these, fortunately, there are enough for a test such
as is proposed; a test, which as it is among the most crucial that
can be applied, so also is it among the most valuable of the internal
evidences of the book's divine origin.

Here the reader should be reminded [5] that several conditions
should exist respecting prophecies to be used as evidence of divine
inspiration either in book or prophet: first, that prediction antedates
the events which fulfill it; second, that the events must be of a
nature that no merely human foresight, or judgment, unaided by divine
inspiration or revelation, could have foretold them; third, the events
that fulfill the prophecy must be of a nature that they cannot be
brought about by the natural powers of the prophet himself, or agencies
under his control. Such conditions unquestionably prevail in respect of
all the prophecies here adduced in evidence.

I begin by reference to two prophetic passages in which the Holy
Ghost must necessarily be the agency through which the fulfillment is
realized. I start with these because it must be evident that if the
predictions are fulfilled through the agency of the Holy Ghost there
can be no deception charged or doubt remain either of the genuineness
of the prophecies or of the reality of their fulfillment.


_A Testimony Shall be Given by the Holy Ghost._

First, then, the prophecy that a testimony to the truth of the Book
of Mormon shall be given by the Holy Ghost. In closing up the Nephite
record which had been given into his charge by his father Mormon,
Moroni in a final word to those to whom the work in after ages would
come, says:

    And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye
    would ask God, the eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these
    things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with
    real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of
    them unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost; and by the power of
    the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. [6]

I do not hesitate to pronounce this one of the boldest prophecies of
Holy Writ, and certainly one which no imposter would dare place in
a book he was palming off upon the world as a revelation from God,
since it affords such immediate means of testing the truth of his
pretentions. It is the same character of test as that boldly supplied
by the Son of God himself for testing the truth of the whole Christian
scheme when he said:

    My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do
    his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God or
    whether I speak of myself. [7]

There can be no question as to the prophetic character of the passage
from the Book of Mormon--When you receive this record, ask God in
the name of Christ, if it be true, and he will manifest the truth of
it unto you by the power of the Holy Ghost. The only question to be
considered after this is, has the prophecy of a promised testimony
been fulfilled. Hundreds of thousands are ready to answer in the
affirmative; scores of thousands who have died in the faith have left
on record their testimony that the prophecy has been fulfilled in their
experience; and back of the testimony of these thousands is their
life of sacrifice, toil, suffering; together with the contumely and
persecution which they have endured for that testimony. Some of the
witnesses to the fulfillment of this prophecy have even sealed their
testimony with their blood--can evidence of a higher or more solemn
character be pointed to in attestation of any truth? [8]

In passing it may be well to call attention to the fact that the Book
of Mormon in this prophetic promise that its truth shall be made known
by the power of the Holy Ghost, as also its assertion "that by the
power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things"--hits
upon a great general, spiritual truth, viz., that the Holy Ghost is
God's especial witness of revealed truth. It was the Holy Ghost in its
beautiful sign of a dove that bore witness to John that the peasant
Nazarene was indeed the Christ. [9] Paul says that "no man speaking by
the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed, and that no man can say that
Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost." [10] John represents Jesus as
saying, "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from
the Father, even the Spirit of Truth, which proceedeth from the Father,
he shall testify of me." [11] Again, the Comforter is called the very
"Spirit of Truth," and of it Jesus says: "The Comforter, which is the
Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you
all things." [12] Also: "When the Spirit of Truth [the Holy Ghost] is
come, he will guide you into all truth." [13] And so one might continue
to multiply passages to the same effect, but enough is here set, down
to establish the point suggested, viz., that the Book of Mormon hits
upon a very beautiful and universal principle to establish its own
truth by a Divine Witness, viz., the Holy Ghost. Observe also that this
great doctrine is not introduced by way of argument nor as a deduction.
It is mentioned, one might say, in a purely incidental manner. Nothing
especially is made of it by Moroni who sets it down. No appeal is made
to its strength or reasonableness. One feels that it is the statement
of a great truth purely as a matter of fact that has been verified in
the experience of Moroni, without any special consciousness of how it
interlocks with and is supported by all the scriptures that treat of
the same subject. On the theory of the Book of Mormon not being what it
claims to be, but regarding it for a moment as the work of "imposters,"
I ask the upholders of that theory this question: How comes it that in
speaking of the chief source of evidence for its truth, the "imposters"
hit upon this universal principle by which revealed truths can be
known? And, indeed, desiring to cover the whole subject involved in
this prophetic promise of a Divine Witness to the truth of the Book of
Mormon, I ask how dare they promise a Divine Witness to an "imposture"
at all?


_"They Shall Have the Gift and Power of the Holy Ghost_."

The second prophecy to which reference has been made, and which must
necessarily be filled through the agency of the Holy Spirit, was
given under these circumstances: The Lord made it known to the first
Nephi that many precious truths of the gospel would be subverted by
the wickedness of men-made churches in the last days, but the Lord
gives a promise that he would manifest himself unto the descendants
of Nephi, and that they should write many things which he, the Lord,
would minister unto them. Things which would be plain and precious:
"And after thy seed shall be destroyed and dwindle in unbelief," said
the Lord, "behold these things shall be hid up to come forth unto
the Gentiles by the gift and power of the Lamb; and in them shall be
written my gospel, saith the Lamb, and my rock and my salvation:"--

    And blessed are they who shall seek to bring forth my Zion at that
    day, for they shall have the gift and power of the Holy Ghost. [14]

In the presence of this prophecy I stand perplexed, not however for
want of material to prove the prophecy true. A volume might be compiled
of instances from the experiences of Elders who have sought to bring
forth the Zion of God in the last days, who have clearly worked under
the power and influence of the Holy Ghost; but this is out of the
question here. All that can be done is to select instances of a typical
character that will illustrate what is meant by the prophecy, and also
prove its fulfillment. I shall select these quite at random, beginning
with some related by the late President Wilford Woodruff, describing
the circumstances under which he first heard of Mormonism, 1833.

    The whisperings of the Spirit of the Lord for a space of three
    years taught me that the Lord was about to set up his Church and
    Kingdom in the earth in the last days, in fulfillment of promises
    made by ancient prophets, and apostles, who spoke as they were
    moved upon by the inspiration of Almighty God. While in this state
    of mind I went with my brother Azmon to Richland, Oswego county,
    New York. We bought a farm and commenced business. In December,
    1833, two Mormon Elders, viz., Ezra Pulsipher and Elijah Cheney,
    came into our town and stopped at our house. Elder Pulsipher said
    he was commanded by the spirit of the Lord to go into the north
    country, and he and Elder Cheney had walked from Favins, via
    Syracuse, nearly sixty miles, through deep snows, and our house was
    the first place he felt impelled to stop at. He appointed a meeting
    at the school house which I attended, and on hearing him preach I
    felt that his sermon was the first gospel sermon I had ever heard
    in my life. I invited these Elders home and spent the night in
    conversation and in reading the Book of Mormon. I was thoroughly
    convinced it was a true record of the word of God. My brother Azmon
    and myself offered ourselves for baptism, and on the thirty-first
    day of December, 1833, Elder Pulsipher went with us to the creek
    and baptized us.

The circumstances under which he was called to the ministry he gives as

    I was still holding the office of a Teacher, and knowing for myself
    that the fulness of the Gospel of Christ, which God had revealed
    to Joseph Smith, was true, I had a great desire to preach it to
    the inhabitants of the earth, but as a Teacher I had no authority
    to preach the gospel to the world. I went into the forest near
    Lyman Wight's [in Daviess county, Missouri, to which place Brother
    Woodruff had meantime removed] one Sunday morning, aside from the
    abodes of men, and made my desire known unto the Lord. I prayed
    that the Lord would open my way and give me the privilege of
    preaching the gospel. I did not make my request expecting any honor
    from man, for I knew that the preaching of the gospel was attended
    with hard labor and persecution. While I was praying, the Spirit
    of the Lord rested upon me, and testified to me that my prayer was
    heard, and that my request would be granted. I arose to my feet
    and walked some three hundred yards into a broad road, rejoicing.
    As I came into the road I saw Judge Elias Higbee standing before
    me. As I walked up to him he said, "Wilford, the Lord has revealed
    to me that it is your duty to go into the vineyard of the Lord and
    preach the gospel." I told him if that was the will of the Lord I
    was ready to go. I did not tell him that I had been praying for
    that privilege. I had been boarding at Lyman Wight's with Judge
    Higbee for months, and it was the first time he had ever named such
    a thing to me.

Soon after this Elder Woodruff was ordained a Priest, and sent on a
mission to Arkansas and Tennessee.

During the ministry of Elder Woodruff in England, after he had become
an Apostle in the Church, he records the following item of his
experience, which was published by him in a little work called "Leaves
from My Journal:"

    March 1st, 1840, was my birthday [anniversary], when I was
    thirty-three years of age. It being Sunday, I preached twice
    through the day to a large assembly in the City Hall, in the town
    of Hanley, and administered the sacrament unto the Saints. In
    the evening I again met with a large assembly of the Saints and
    strangers, and while singing the first hymn the Spirit of the
    Lord rested upon me, and the voice of God said to me: "This is
    the last meeting that you will hold with people for many days."
    I was astonished at this, as I had many appointments out in that
    district. When I arose to speak to the people, I told them that it
    was the last meeting I should hold with them for many days. They
    were as much astonished as I was. At the close of the meeting four
    persons came forward for baptism, and we went down into the water
    and baptized them. In the morning I went in secret before the Lord,
    and asked him what his will was concerning me. The answer I got
    was, that I should go to the south, for the Lord had a great work
    for me to perform there, as many souls were awaiting for the word
    of the Lord. [15]

Obedient to the instructions of the Spirit, Elder Woodruff went south
into Herefordshire, where he "found a society called 'United Brethren,'
numbering about six hundred members and fifty preachers. They were
prepared for the reception of the Gospel, so that upon hearing Elder
Woodruff's testimony, they came forward and in thirty days he baptized
one hundred and sixty persons, forty-eight of whom were preachers,
including their presiding Elder, Thomas Kingston. Three clerks of
the Church of England were sent by their ministers to see what he
was doing, and he baptized them; also a constable who came to arrest
him." [16] Subsequently the field of labor widened and through the
blessings of God Elder Woodruff was enabled in the course of eight
months to bring into the Church over eight hundred souls, including all
of the six hundred United Brethren; also some two hundred preachers of
various denominations. [17]

Elder Woodruff also relates the following incident, among many others,
as illustrating the operations of the Spirit of the Lord upon his mind
for his bodily preservation:

    In 1848, after my return to Winter Quarters from our pioneer
    journey, I was appointed by the Presidency of the Church to take my
    family and go to Boston to gather up the remnant of the Latter-day
    Saints and lead them to the valleys of the mountains. While on my
    way east I put my carriage into the yard of one of the brethren in
    Indiana, and Brother Orson Hyde set his wagon by the side of mine,
    and not more than two feet from it. Dominicus Carter, of Provo,
    and my wife and four children were with me. My wife, one child and
    I went to bed in the carriage, the rest sleeping in the house. I
    had been in bed but a short time when a voice said to me: "Get
    up, and move your carriage." It was not thunder, lightning nor an
    earthquake, but the still, small voice of the Spirit of God--the
    Holy Ghost. I told my wife I must get up and move my carriage.
    She asked, "What for?" I told her I did not know, only the Spirit
    told me to do it. I got up and moved my carriage several rods, and
    set it by the side of the house. As I was returning to bed the
    same Spirit said to me, "Go and move your mules away from that oak
    tree," which was about one hundred yards, north of our carriage. I
    moved them to a young hickory grove and tied them up. I then went
    to bed. In thirty minutes a whirlwind caught the tree to which my
    mules had been fastened, broke it off near the ground, and carried
    it one hundred yards, sweeping away two fences in its course, and
    laid it prostrate through that yard where my carriage stood, and
    the top limbs hit my carriage as it was. In the morning I measured
    the trunk of the tree which fell where my carriage had stood, and
    found it five feet in diameter. It came within a foot of Brother
    Hyde's wagon, but did not touch it. Thus, by obeying the revelation
    of the Spirit of God to me I saved my life and the lives of my wife
    and child, as well as my animals. In the morning I went on my way
    rejoicing. [18]

The following is a statement from the biography of Elder Heber C.
Kimball, one of the members of the first quorum of the Twelve in this
latter-day dispensation, and afterwards for some years Counselor to
President Brigham Young, speaking of the time when he first heard the
gospel preached, in 1831:

    The glorious news of a restored gospel and a living priesthood,
    commissioned of and communicating with the heavens; the promise
    of the Holy Ghost, with signs following the believer, as in days
    of old; the wondrous declaration of angels revisiting the earth,
    breaking the silence of ages, bringing messages from another
    world--all this fell upon the heart of this God-fearing man, and
    on the hearts of his friends and companions, like dew upon thirsty
    ground. As the voice of a familiar spirit, it seemed an echo from
    the far past--something they had known before. Both Heber [C.
    Kimball] and Brigham [Young] received the word gladly, and were
    impelled to testify of its divinity. Then the power of God fell
    upon them. "On one occasion," says Heber, "Father John Young,
    Brigham Young, Joseph Young and myself had come together to get up
    some wood for Phineas H. Young. While we were thus engaged we were
    pondering upon those things which had been told us by the Elders,
    and upon the Saints gathering to Zion, when the glory of God shone
    upon us, and we saw the gathering of the Saints to Zion, and the
    glory that would rest upon them; and many more things connected
    with the great event, such as the sufferings and persecutions that
    would come upon the people of God, and the calamities and judgments
    that would come upon the world." [19]

The year 1848 in Utah--the year following the advent of the pioneers
into Salt Lake Valley--was a very trying one. The people were
threatened with famine, and it was only by the exercise of the most
rigid economy and putting the people on scant rations that they could
hope to make the meager supplies of provisions last until the next
harvest. The settlers were but half clad as well as half fed, and such
clothing as they had was in tatters, and in many cases consisted of the
skins of wild animals. It was in the midst of these conditions that
Heber C. Kimball in a congregation of the saints made the following
remarkable prophecy:

    It will be but a little while, brethren, before you shall have food
    and raiment in abundance, and shall buy it cheaper than it can be
    bought in the cities of the United States.

"I do not believe a word of it," said Elder Charles C. Rich, a member
of the Council of the Apostles; and perhaps nine-tenths of those who
had heard the astounding declaration were of the same opinion. Even
the prophet Heber himself was heard to say "that he was afraid he had
missed it this time." His biographer, however, relates the fulfillment
of the prophecy in the following passage:

    The occasion for the fulfillment of this remarkable prediction
    was the unexpected advent of the gold-hunters, on their way to
    California. The discovery of gold in that land had set on fire, as
    it were, the civilized world, and hundreds of richly laden trains
    now began pouring across the continent on their way to the new
    Eldorado. Salt Lake Valley became the resting-place, or "halfway
    house" of the nation, and before the Saints had had time to recover
    from their surprise at Heber's temerity in making such a prophecy,
    the still more wonderful fulfillment was brought to their very
    doors. The gold-hunters were actuated by but one desire: to reach
    the Pacific Coast; the thirst for mammon having absorbed, for the
    time, all other sentiments and desires. Impatient at their slow
    progress, in order to lighten their loads, they threw away or "sold
    for a song" the valuable merchandise with which they had stored
    their wagons to cross the plains. Their choice, blooded, though
    now jaded stock, they eagerly exchanged for the fresh mules and
    horses of the pioneers, and bartered off, at almost any sacrifice,
    dry goods, groceries, provisions, tools, clothing, etc., for the
    most primitive outfits, with barely enough provisions to enable
    them to reach their journey's end. Thus, as the Prophet Heber had
    predicted, "States goods" were actually sold in the streets of
    Great Salt Lake City cheaper than they could have been purchased in
    the City of New York. [20]

It has already been pointed out that the gift of prophecy, involving as
it does the power to foresee future events, is peculiarly the power of
God's inspired servants. It is the direct influence of the Holy Ghost
upon the human mind that enables men to foretell future events. "How
be it when he, the Spirit of Truth, is come [i. e. the Holy Ghost], he
will guide you unto all truth. * * * * * * And he will show you things
to come." [21]

So that man possessed of the spirit of prophecy as this man, Elder
Heber C. Kimball was possessed of it, has, in fulfillment of God's
promise to his servants in the last days, the "gift and power of the
Holy Ghost."

The late Elder George Q. Cannon relates the following as his experience
when on a mission to the Hawaiian Islands. The company of missionaries
of which he was a member had become disheartened in their labors, but
Elder Cannon had resolved to stay there, "master the language and warn
the people of those Islands if he had to do it alone." And now his own
account of the incident:

    My desire to learn to speak [the Hawaiian language] was very
    strong; it was present with me night and day, and I never permitted
    an opportunity of talking with the natives to pass without
    improving it. I also tried to exercise faith before the Lord to
    obtain the gift of talking and understanding the language. One
    evening, while sitting on the mat conversing with some neighbors
    who had dropped in, I felt an uncommonly great desire to understand
    what they said. All at once I felt a peculiar sensation in my ears;
    I jumped to my feet, with my hands at the side of my head, and
    exclaimed to Elders Bigler and Keeler who sat at the table, that
    I believed I had received the gift of interpretation! And it was
    so. From that time forward I had but little, if any, difficulty in
    understanding what the people said. I might not be able at once to
    separate every word which they spoke from every other word in the
    sentence; but I could tell the general meaning of the whole. This
    was a great aid to me in learning to speak the language, and I felt
    very thankful for this gift from the Lord. [22]

A similar instance is related by President Joseph F. Smith, also
connected with the Hawaiian mission, to which he was called in 1854.
The following is his own narrative:

    I * * * was set apart * * * under the hands of Parley P. Pratt and
    Orson Hyde, Parley being mouth. He declared that I should obtain a
    knowledge of the Hawaiian language "by the gift of God, as well as
    by study." Up to this time my schooling had been extremely limited.
    My mother taught me to read and write, by the camp fires, and
    subsequently by the greater luxury of the primeval tallow-candle in
    the covered wagon and the old log cabin, 10x12 feet in size, when
    first the soles of our feet found rest, after the weary months of
    travel across the plains. When I say, therefore, that within four
    months after my arrival on the Sandwich Islands--two weeks of which
    time were consumed by the most severe sickness I had ever known--I
    was prepared to enter upon the duties of my ministry, and did so
    with a native companion, with whom I made a tour of the Island of
    Maui, visiting, holding meetings, blessing children, administering
    the sacrament, etc., all in the Hawaiian language, it may be
    inferred that Parley's promise upon my head was literally fulfilled.

As remarked at the outset of this subdivision it would be no difficult
matter to compile a volume of incidents of such manifestations of
the spirit and power of God from the experiences of Elders of the
Church in illustration of, and in proof of, this Book of Mormon
prophetic-promise; but the foregoing must be relied upon as typical
incidents, and I shall trust to them also to indicate what the force
would be of a very large volume of such evidence, which, I am sure,
from personal experience, from observation and knowledge of our Church
annals, could be compiled.

I shall ask the reader, however, to consider in this connection,
the very great body of religious truth which is developed in the
revelations given in these latter days to the Church of Christ (chiefly
compiled in the book called The Doctrine and Covenants), in which
"Mormonism," so called, had its origin, and all of which are the result
of the inspired visions to Joseph Smith, or due to the operations of
the Holy Spirit upon the mind of that prophet. I therefore invoke this
body of doctrine as demonstrating the truth of the prophecy-promise--

    Blessed are they who shall seek to bring forth my Zion at that
    day, for they shall have the gift and power of the Holy Ghost.

I invoke in its support the chapter on "the Manner of the Prophet's
Teaching" in volume I of the New Witnesses; [23] I invoke the chapter
on "Miracles--the Evidence of Fulfilled Promises;" [24] also the
chapters on "The Evidence of Prophecy;" [25] as also the chapter on "The
Church Founded by Joseph Smith a Monument to His Inspiration;" [26]
let all this in the mind of the reader, be brought in at this point
and made part of the argument in support of the fulfillment of the
prophecy that those who seek to bring forth the Zion of God in the
last days, shall have the gift and power of the Holy Ghost; and he
will begin to see how invincibly strong the argument must be upon this
head. In addition to all this, however, I also call attention to the
evidence of inspiration that may be found in the operation of Church
leaders since the martyrdom of the first Prophet of the Church. The
evidence of inspiration in Brigham Young and his associates in the
matter of conducting that marvelous Exodus from Nauvoo, Illinois,
through a thousand miles of wilderness to the Rocky Mountains. The
evidence of Divine inspiration manifested also in the establishment of
settlements in the inter-Rocky Mountain region--which in time grew into
commonwealths of the American Union. The evident inspiration in the
policies adopted by these leaders--all essential to the preservation of
the Saints in their organized capacity--necessary to the preservation
of the Church of Christ, and now too universally recognized and
applauded to need particularization. Men assign these achievements
to the genius of Brigham Young; they establish his reputation in the
eyes of the world as a leader of men. He is recognized as among the
most remarkable men of the age, and is ranked as being among the first
Americans. But to the Saints, these achievements merely establish the
truth of one of the predictions of the Book of Mormon, viz.,

    Blessed are they who shall seek to bring forth my Zion at that
    day, for they shall have the gift and power of the Holy Ghost.


_Three Witnesses Shall Behold the Book "By the Gift and Power of God_."

In the writings of the first Nephi the following prediction with
reference to Three Witnesses who should testify to the truth of the
Book of Mormon is found:

    Wherefore, at that day when the book shall be delivered unto the
    man of whom I have spoken, the book shall be hid from the eyes of
    the world, that the eyes of none shall behold it save it be that
    Three Witnesses shall behold it, by the power of God, besides him
    to whom the book shall be delivered; and they shall testify to the
    truth of the book and the things therein. And there is none other
    which shall view it, save it be a few, according to the will of
    God, to bear testimony of his word unto the children of men. [27]

A similiar prediction is made in Ether:

    And unto three shall they [the Nephite plates] be shown by the
    power of God; wherefore they shall known of a surety that these
    things are true. [28]

Of course I am prepared to hear it said that it would be an easy matter
for an imposter to make such a prophecy as this with reference to a
work which he was bringing forth; but would it be within the power of
an imposter to cause an angel to come from heaven and stand before
these Witnesses in the broad light of day and exhibit the Nephite
plates and the Urim and Thummim? Could he cause the glory of God more
brilliant than the light of the sun at noon-day to shine about them?
Could he cause the voice of God to be heard from the midst of the glory
saying that the work was true, the translation correct, and commanding
these witnesses to bear testimony to the world of its truth? Certainly
all this would be beyond the power of an imposter to achieve however
cunning he might be. Yet this is what the Three Witnesses declare was
done. Of course it could still be urged that the Three Witnesses were
in collusion with the Prophet, but all probabilities of that matter
have been considered at great length in volume II., chapters fourteen
to twenty-two inclusive, and the weight of evidence is against any such
theory, and therefore their testimony bears witness to the fulfillment
of the remarkable prophecy here considered.


_The Blood of Saints Shall Cry From the Ground to be Avenged When
the Book of Mormon Shall Come Forth_.

The first Nephi, fifth century B. C., writing of the conditions which
would obtain when the Nephite record should come forth to the world

    The things which shall be written out of the book shall be of great
    worth unto the children of men and especially unto our seed, which
    is a remnant of the house of Israel. For it shall come to pass in
    that day, that the churches which are built up, and not unto the
    Lord, when the one shall say unto the other, Behold I, I am the
    Lord's; and the others shall say, I, I am the Lord's. And thus
    shall every one say that hath built up churches, and not unto the
    Lord. And they shall contend one with another; and their priests
    shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their
    learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance. And they
    deny the power of God, the Holy One of Israel: and they say unto
    the people, Hearken unto us, and hear ye our precept; for behold
    there is no God today for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done his
    work, and he hath given his power unto men. Behold, hearken ye unto
    my precept; if they shall say, There is a miracle wrought, by the
    hand of the Lord, believe it not; for this day he is not a God of
    miracles; he hath done his work. Yea, and there shall be many which
    shall say, Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die; and it
    shall be well with us. There shall also be many which shall say,
    Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God, he will justify
    in committing a little sin, yea, lie a little, take the advantage
    of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is
    no harm in this. And do all these things, for tomorrow we die:
    and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few
    stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God. Yea,
    and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false,
    and vain, and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their
    hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord;
    _and their works shall be in the dark, and the blood of the Saints
    shall cry from the ground against them_. [29]

This prophecy in substance is repeated by Mormon, including the
singular prediction that the Book of Mormon should come forth, "In a
day when the blood of the saints shall cry unto the Lord, because of
secret combinations and works of darkness." [30]

A more vivid description of Christendom in the early part of the 19th
century could scarcely be written than that given in these passages.
I shall be told, however, that it is a description which even an
imposter could easily give circumstanced as was Joseph Smith. His
experience through announcing his first revelation was sufficient
to test the manner in which Christendom was prepared to receive an
alleged new revelation, and he was sufficiently familiar with the
prevailing "Christian" notion that the days of miracles were past,
to formulate the part of the foregoing arraignment dealing with that
subject. He also knew something of the pride and haughtiness of
Christian sects, and with this knowledge as a foundation it can with
some reason be urged that he could easily write the description of
Christendom found in these quotations from the Book of Mormon. There
is one item within the prophecy, however, both in the first Nephi's
writings and also Mormon's that Joseph Smith could not know except
through the inspiration of God, viz., that "the blood of the Saints
shall cry from the ground" against this corrupted Christendom. The
people of the great American Republic, would as soon have been brought
to believe in the return of the age of miracles as to believe that the
time would come when the blood of Saints would cry from their soil to
the God of Sabaoth for vengeance against any of them. Had not the day
of religious persecution, at least within the enlightened republic
of the new world, forever passed away? Had not the great government
of the United States, destined to dominate by its influence the
American continents--had it not been founded upon the broad principles
of religious and civil freedom? Were not the rights of conscience
guaranteed by specific provisions both in the national constitution and
in the state constitutions? Was not America in those days especially
heralded as the asylum for the oppressed of every land? Was it not the
boast of our statesmen that a nation had at last been founded where
religious freedom was recognized as the chief corner stone in the
temple of liberty? How bold indeed must that man be who would--while
the people were yet enjoying this very feast of liberty--rise up
and say that the blood of Saints should cry from American ground to
God for vengeance! Yet such is the prediction of these old Nephite
writers, whose words were translated into the English language by
Joseph Smith. And the only question to be considered here is--since
the reality of the prophecy cannot be questioned--has the prophecy
been fulfilled? Let the blood of those Saints who were killed and who
died from the effects of exposure during the expulsion from Jackson
county, in 1833, answer. [31] Let the blood of David W. Patten, one of
the twelve Apostles in this last dispensation, together with the blood
of young Patrick O'Banion and Gideon Carter, slain at Crooked River,
Missouri, in 1838, answer. [32] Let the blood of the innocent men, and
children martyred at Haun's Mills, in Missouri, answer; [33] let the
innocent blood of all those whose lives were sacrificed at DeWitt and
in and about Far West and during the expulsion of some twelve thousand
Latter-day Saints from the state of Missouri in 1839, answer. Let the
innocent blood of the Prophet Joseph Smith himself and that of his
brother Hyrum slain at Carthage prison, in June, 1844--while under the
plighted faith of the state of Illinois for their protection--let their
blood answer. Let the blood of many others that were slain in Nauvoo
and vicinity during the two years following, and also the martyrdom of
many who died from exposure and want in the enforced exodus from Nauvoo
to the Rocky mountains--the victims of "Christian" tolerance--answer.
Let the blood of Elder Joseph Standing, killed by a mob in the state
of Georgia, 1879,--answer. Let the blood of Elders John F. Gibbs and
William Berry who were murdered in Tennessee while in the very act of
opening a meeting for the preaching of the gospel, answer; as also the
blood of their two friends, the Condor brothers, who were shot down in
their father's house while trying to protect these Elders from their
assailants. Let all these instances of martyrdom testify of the truth
of this prophecy of the Book of Mormon; for these martyrdoms were
endured for the word of God which it contains, and not for any crime
alleged against those who suffered. Nay, in nearly all these cases
crime was not even alleged.

A singular thing connected with these martyrdoms is the fact that in
no instance have the perpetrators of these murders been brought to
justice. Perhaps it is fitting that it should be so. It seems to make
the martyrdom more complete; and more fully meets the terms of the
prophecy since, according to that prophecy, the blood of Saints in the
day when the Nephite scriptures should be brought to light, was to cry
unto the Lord from the ground for vengeance, clearly foreshadowing the
fact that man would not avenge it.


_Because my Word Shall Hiss Forth, Many Shall say "A Bible! A

Another item of interest in the coming forth of the Book of Mormon is
the predicted clamor that should be raised against it. Here follows the
prophecy--the Lord is speaking to the first Nephi:

    Behold, there shall be many at that day when I shall proceed to
    do a marvelous work among them; * * * when I shall remember the
    promises which I have made unto thee, Nephi; * * * that the words
    of your seed shall proceed forth out of my mouth unto your seed;
    and because my words shall hiss forth many of the Gentiles shall
    say, A Bible, A Bible, we have got a Bible, and there cannot be any
    more Bible. [34]

It is notorious that this cry was raised--and even now is raised at
times--against the Book of Mormon. It was relied upon not only as
the chief but also the all-sufficient argument against accepting the
book, as is abundantly proved by reference to the arguments of the
Elders in answer to the objections urged against it. [35] For example
in Orson Pratt's most excellent work, "Divine Authenticity of the Book
of Mormon," there are such headings as these--and in the body of this
work under the respective topics he meets and entirely overthrows all
sectarian argument that the Book of Mormon ought to be rejected because
it claims to be a new revelation: "To Expect More Revelation is not
Unscriptural;" "To Expect More Revelation is not Unreasonable;" "More
Revelation is Indispensably Necessary."--(a) for Calling the Officers
of the Church--(b) To Point out the Duties of the Officers in the
Church--(c) To Comfort, Reprove and Teach the Church--(d) To Unfold
to the Church the Future; "The Bible and Traditions Without Further
Revelation an Insufficient Guide." From these topics may be gathered
the class of objections urged against the Book of Mormon; and as Elder
Pratt so admirably treats that subject, I do not deem it necessary to
enter into that field, since all may inform themselves how complete
the victory of the Elders has been in that controversy by reference to
Elder Pratt's works. I am interested in the matter here only to the
extent of pointing out the fact that the prophecy that the Book of
Mormon would be met with the cry--"A Bible, a Bible, we have a Bible
and there cannot be any more Bible," has been fulfilled. [36]

Closely associated with the sectarian notion of the cessation of
revelation and miracles is also the idea that the Hebrew scriptures
comprised all the records in which God had vouchedsafed a revelation
to man. That is, the Hebrew volume comprised the whole of sacred
scripture. In 1829 at the city of Cincinnati, during the very great
debate which there took place between Alexander Campbell and Robert
Owen--an unbeliever in the Bible,--on the Evidences of Christianity,
the following very positive question was submitted in writing to Mr.

    Are the books composing the Old and New Testaments the only books
    of divine authority in the world?

To this question Mr. Campbell gave this very emphatic answer--and up
to that time at least, I do not hesitate to say that he voiced the
sentiments of all Christendom; and this was the answer of Mr. Campbell:

    "I answer, emphatically yes." [37]

The "yes" Mr. Campbell writes in italics.

The foreging should be modified by this explanation, viz: all divisions
of Christendom are not agreed upon all the books that comprise what
is called the Bible. It is well known that the Catholics regard as
canonical some books which the Protestants hold to be apocryphal,
and in addition to the written word of God, I am mindful that the
great Roman Catholic church adds the unwritten word of God. In other
words, the traditions of the church are regarded as the word of God.
The Protestants generally accept the books of the English authorized
version of the Holy Scriptures, translated in 1611, and known as
King James' Translation, pointing out by name those books which were
regarded as of doubtful origin and which for that reason they call the
apocrypha. The Roman Catholic church accepts the books enumerated in
what is known as the Douay edition of the Bible, of 1609; revised and
corrected in 1750. It would therefore be proper to say that each of
these great divisions of Christendom would claim that the list of books
comprised within the respective editions of the Bible which they accept
are the only books of divine authority in the world.

The answer which the Lord in the Book of Mormon is represented as
making to this sectarian view of revelation; as also to this clamor
against the Book of Mormon, is in every way worthy of him:

    Thou fool, that shall say, a Bible, we have got a Bible, and we
    need no more Bible. * * * Know ye not that there are more nations
    than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all
    men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea;
    and that I rule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath;
    and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon
    all the nations of the earth? Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye
    shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of
    two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember
    one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words
    unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall
    run together, the testimony of the two nations shall run together

    And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same
    yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words
    according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one
    word, ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work
    is not yet finished; neither shall it be, until the end of man;
    neither from that time henceforth and forever. Wherefore, because
    that ye have a Bible, ye need not suppose that it contains all my
    words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be
    written; for I command all men, both in the east and in the west,
    and in the north and in the south, and in the islands of the sea,
    that they shall write the words which I speak unto them: for out
    of the books which shall be written, I will judge the world, every
    man according to his works, according to that which is written. For
    behold, I shall speak unto the Jews, and they shall write it; and
    I shall also speak unto the Nephites, and they shall write it; and
    I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel,
    which I have led away, and they shall write it; and I shall also
    speak unto all nations of the earth, and they shall write it. And
    it shall come to pass that the Jews shall have the words of the
    Nephites, and the Nephites shall have the words of the Jews; and
    the Nephites and the Jews shall have the words of the lost tribes
    of Israel; and the lost tribes of Israel shall have the words of
    the Nephites and the Jews. And it shall come to pass that my people
    which are of the house of Israel shall be gathered home unto the
    lands of their possession; and my word also shall be gathered in
    one. [38]

I say this answer is worthy of God to utter, and worthy of man to heed.
It lifts us entirely out of narrow, sectarian views of revelation,
and breathes a universal spirit of interest and love for mankind. It
carries within itself the evidence of a divine inspiration. Its very
worthiness of God is a testimony of its truth. How petty and unworthy
in contrast with it is that sectarian Christian view that would limit
God's revealed word to the few books contained in the Bible! How
partial and unjust does that same sectarian view of revelation make
God appear! If there is one doctrine more emphasized in the teachings
of the New Testament that another, it is that God is no respecter
of persons; "but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh
righteousness, is accepted with him." [39] With this fact in mind let us
test the two conceptions of God's dealings with man in the matter of
revelation. The narrow, sectarian, "Christian" view, and the Book of
Mormon view; and this for the purpose of ascertaining which would be
the more worthy of God, which most like him.

We have learned in the previous chapters of this work that America
was inhabited by highly civilized races before the discovery of it by
Europeans; that in the western world there flourished civilizations
equal to those of the same period in the eastern hemisphere; cities
that, judging from their ruins, equalled in greatness Tyre and Sidon
and Nineveh and Babylon; and empires that rivalled in power and extent,
Egypt, Persia and Macedonia. Millions of God's children through
successive generations lived in them and died and were buried. The
sectarian view of revelation would ask us to believe that God sent
prophets and holy men to teach and instruct his children in the eastern
hemisphere; that he revealed to them something of his own character
and attributes; that by revelation direct from heaven, accompanied
by demonstrations of his own marvelous power, he made known to them
something of the object of their existence, and gave them the hope of
eternal life; that in the meridian of time he sent his Only Begotten
Son among them, in order that life and immortality might be more
clearly brought to light; that the matchless Son of God by example as
well as by precept taught the inhabitants of the old world the way of
life--the divine will--in a word, taught the Gospel--organized a Church
to perpetuate his doctrines--commissioned apostles and others to carry
on the work of salvation; and thus made ample provisions for carrying
the Gospel throughout Asia, Africa and Europe--for the Church of
Christ in the East was organized where these natural divisions of the
old world center--yet, while the Lord made all these efforts for the
instruction and salvation of his children in the eastern hemisphere,
this sectarian idea that the Bible contains all the revelation God has
ever given would compel us to believe that he altogether neglected
his children of the western world! No prophet was sent to them with a
message to explain the mystery of existence, to let them know whence
their origin, the object of their existence, or bid them indulge the
pleasing hope of immortality. No angel from the bright worlds on high
came to reveal the splendor of heaven, or show the path which leads
to endless bliss; no messenger came even from the wilderness crying
repentance to them, and making the announcement that the kingdom of
heaven was at hand; no Messiah of gentle mien, yet of serene majesty,
taught them the mystery of the divine love which works out man's
redemption, healed their sick, raised their dead, or even so much
as blessed their children. No; according to the sectarian Christian
theory of the extent of revelation, God neglected them entirely--left
them to perish in darkness and ignorance and unbelief; unknowing and
unknown! Is such a view as this worthy of God? Does it comport with
the attributes of impartial love towards his children? Is it not a
travesty upon the qualities of justice and mercy as we believe those
qualities to exist in God? Does it not smack rather of man's bigotry
and narrowness, and above all, of human ignorance?

Turn now to the Book of Mormon theory of revelation as set forth in the
words just quoted from the writings of the first Nephi, and couple with
them the words of another Nephite prophet:

    Behold, the Lord doth grant upon all nations, of their own nation
    and tongue, to teach his word; yea, in wisdom, all that he seeth
    fit that they should have; therefore we see that the Lord doth
    counsel in wisdom, according to that which is just and true.

What a contrast in the sectarian and Book of Mormon view of revelation!
The one so narrow, and so contracted to limits unworthy of God! The
other so world-embracing, noble, generous, and worthy of God! The one
so exclusive as to limit divine inspiration to the prophets of the
Hebrew race; the other so broad as to include all the great teachers of

    "The Bactrian, Samian Sage, and all who taught the right."

In these Book of Mormon passages we have the grandest conception
respecting God's dispensations of his word found in human speech. They
recognize God's obligation--born of his Fatherhood and love--to make
known his word and will in some form to all nations and races of men.
They recognize as constituting a noble brotherhood of God-inspired
men, the sages of all races and ages, who have taught their fellow men
better things than they knew before. The wise men among Assyrians and
Egyptians as well as the shepherd-patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
are to be regarded as inspired of God. Jethro, the priest of Midian,
though not of Israel, as well as Moses, possessed divine wisdom; and
even counseled the Hebrew prophet-prince, to the latter's advantage.
The sages of Greece, from Thales to Socrates, Plato and Aristotle,
belong to the same glorious band. So also the great teacher of India,
Siddhartha, Buddah--the enlightened; Kongfutse, the teacher of God's
children in China; Mohammed, the prophet of Arabia; the teachers of
philosophy and reformers of Europe--some professed Christians, some
not, some even making war upon apostate Christendom; but I include all
those within the honored band of the God-inspired who have come with
some measure of the truth to bless mankind, to alleviate somewhat the
hard conditions in which men struggle, and who have raised the thoughts
and hopes of man to higher and better things. "The path of sensuality
and darkness," says a profound modern teacher of moral philosophy, "is
that which most men tread; a few have been led along the upward path;
a few in all countries and generations have been wisdom-seekers or
seekers of God; they have been so because the Divine Word of wisdom
has looked upon them, choosing them for the knowledge and service of
himself." [40] Not that these teachers, sages, prophets have each come
with a fullness of truth; or that they possessed the gospel of Jesus
Christ with divine authority to administer its sacred ordinances; not
so. Such truths as they possessed were often fragmentary, and mingled
with them was much that was human, hence imperfect, and confusing.
But so much of truth as they possessed was God-given, and they but
instruments of God to set it free that the truth might bless mankind.
Our Book of Mormon passages only require us to believe concerning this
world-band of inspired teachers, that they come with that measure of
God's word which in the divine wisdom it is fitting that men among whom
they are called to labor should receive; and this doctrine in relation
to the dispensation of God's word to man is so generous and noble
in its scope, so far above the narrow, sectarian conceptions of the
age and vicinity where the Book of Mormon was brought forth, that it
constitutes a striking evidence in support of its claims.



Closely connected with this matter of the world's clamor against the
Book of Mormon, and their protestations in favor of the Bible, is
the declaration of I Nephi as to the treatment of that same Bible by
Christendom. In one of the great visions granted to this Nephi, and
expounded by an angel, he beholds a book, the Bible, go forth from the
Jews to the Gentiles. Now Nephi's account of the matter:

    And the angel of the Lord said unto me, Thou hast beheld that the
    book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded
    forth from the mouth of a Jew, it contained the plainness of the
    gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and
    they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of
    God; wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity, unto
    the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God; and after
    they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from
    the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the foundation of a great
    and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other
    churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the
    Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many
    covenants of the Lord have they taken away; and all this have they
    done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord; that
    they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children
    of men; wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth
    through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there
    are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which
    is the book of the Lamb of God: and after these plain and precious
    things were taken away, it goeth forth unto all the nations of the
    Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen
    with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity: thou
    seest because of the many plain and precious things which have been
    taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of
    the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the
    Lamb of God; because of these things which are taken away out of
    the gospel of the Lamb, an exceeding great many do stumble, yea,
    insomuch that Satan hath great power over them. [41]

It is disputed, by some, that any such thing as here described has
taken place with reference to the Bible, and labored arguments are made
to prove that contention. [42]

Into that contention it is not necessary to enter at length. It will be
sufficient to show that there are many books referred to in the several
books comprising the Old and New Testaments that are not to be found in
that collection. Books that are spoken of as containing revelations;
books written by prophets and apostles, and evidently as much entitled
to a place in the canon of scriptures as those that are now there. What
has become of them? Who is responsible for their absence? Pointing
to the excellence of those books we have is no compensation for the
absence of those we have not. So long as the books of scripture we
hold in reverence, as containing the word of God, speak of other books
and epistles that contained revelations from the Spirit of God that
are not in the Bible, it is useless to contend that our collection of
sacred books, called the Bible, contains the whole word of God. These
absent books may, as Nephi declares they do, contain many precious and
plain parts of God's truth, which would have preserved the Christian
world from many of the doctrinal errors into which it has been plunged
for want of knowledge. Again I ask, who is responsible for the absence
of these books? Nephi declares that "a great and abominable church"
is responsible for their absence, that that church took them away. I
do not believe that Nephi here had reference to any one of the many
divisions of Christendom. Nephi, in fact, recognized the existence of
two churches only. One he styles, "the church of the Lamb of God;" and
the other he bluntly calls "the church of the devil." [43] "And whoso
belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God, belongeth to that
great church which is the mother of abominations; the whore of all the
earth." [44]

The church then that withheld from the world the part of the word of
God, as developed in the teachings and writings of the apostles, was
undoubtedly apostate Christendom; massed under the general title of
the "great and abominable church," without reference to any of its
divisions of sub-divisions; and that is the power that withheld and
destroyed some parts of the scriptures. In proof of which I cite the
following references to sacred books and writings both in the Old and
New Testaments, which are not to be found in it.

First, books of the Old Testament:

The scriptures that existed in the days of Abraham, older than the five
books of Moses, for Abraham was before Moses. These scriptures are
referred to by Paul as follows: "And the scriptures foreseeing that God
would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel
unto Abraham." (Gal. iii: 8).

The book of the covenant, through which Moses instructed Israel. (Exo.
xxiv: 7).

The book of the wars of the Lord. (Num. xxi: 14).

The book of Jasher. (Josh. x: 13, and Sam. i: 18).

The book of the manner of the kingdom. (Sam. x: 25).

Books containing three thousand proverbs, a thousand and five songs, a
treatise on natural history by Solomon. (I. Kings iv: 32, 33).

The acts of Solomon. (I. Kings xi: 41).

The book of Nathan the prophet. (I. Chron. xxix: 29).

The book of Gad the Seer. (I. Chron. xxix: 29).

The book of Nathan the prophet. (I. Chron. xxix: 29 and II. Chron. ix:

The prophecy of Ahijah, the Shilonite. (II. Chron. ix: 29).

The visions of Iddo the Seer. (II. Chron. ix: 29).

The book of Shemaiah the prophet. (II. Chron. xii: 15).

The story of the prophet Iddo. (II. Chron. xiii: 22).

The book of Jehu. (Chron. xx: 34).

Second, books of the New Testament.

It is evident from the preface of St. Luke's Gospel, that "many"
who were eye witnesses of the things most surely believed among the
Christians, took it in hand by means of writing books to set them forth
in order. (Luke 5: 1-4). But of the writings of those eye witnesses, it
can scarcely be said that we have the works of "many" of them.

Jude, speaking of some characters which he likens unto "raging waves
of the sea foaming out their own shame," says, "And Enoch, the seventh
from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with
ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to
convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds
which they have ungodly committed, and all of their hard speeches which
ungodly sinners have spoken against him." (Jude 15, 16). From this it
appears that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, was favored with a vision
even of the second coming of the Son of God, and prophesied of judgment
overtaking the ungodly at that coming. This prophecy of Enoch's was
in existence in the days of Jude, "the servant of Christ," or else he
would not be able to quote from it. May not this prophecy of Enoch's
have been among the "scripture" with which Abraham was acquainted,
mentioned above?

There should also be another epistle of Jude. That writer says, "When
I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it
was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should
earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints." (Jude
3). We have but one epistle of Jude yet he wrote another epistle to
the saints on a very important subject, "The common salvation," and he
"gave all diligence" in writing upon it. Would not the epistle on the
"common salvation" be as important as that one we have from Jude's pen?

Paul, in writing to the Ephesians, states that God made known unto him,
by revelation, a certain mystery; "as," says he, "I wrote afore in
few words whereby when ye read ye may understand my knowledge in the
mystery of Christ." (Eph. iii: 3, 4). Here Paul evidently refers to
another epistle which he had written to the Ephesians, but of which the
world today has no knowledge. This epistle contained a revelation from

When the great apostle to the Gentiles wrote to the Colossians, he
gave them these directions: "When this epistle is read among you, cause
that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that ye
likewise read the epistle from Loadicea." (Col. iv: 16). Here, then,
is another epistle of Paul's, the Epistle to the Laodiceans, which he
himself refers to, but of which the world knows nothing, except this
reference to it--it is not in the Bible.

In the first letter to the Corinthians you find this statement: "I
wrote unto you in an epistle, not to keep company with fornicators."
(Cor. v: 9). That book, then, which the world has so long regarded as
the first epistle to the Corinthians, is not really the first epistle
which Paul wrote to the church at Corinth, for in the quotation given
above, taken from the so-called First Epistle to the Corinthians, the
writer speaks of an epistle which he previously had written to them,
in which he counseled them "not to keep company with fornicators."
Doubtless many other instructions and important principles were
contained in this other Epistle to the Corinthians.

How many other books and epistles, written by inspired men of those
days, were suppressed by "the great and abominable church"--apostate
Christendom--we may not know, but these here incidentally mentioned
have certainly been suppressed. Moreover, I have not mentioned all that
are spoken of. I have carefully avoided referring to any about which
doubts can be entertained, or which could be said to form parts of the
books we have. Deeming it better that the list of absent books should
be shorter than to mention any of which it could be said they are to
be found as fragments, or portions of the books now in the Bible, but
known by other names. [45]

It may be urged, with reference to the Old Testament at least, that
it came from the Jews to the Gentiles in its present form, and that
it was not the Gentiles, not the apostate church of the third and
fourth century of the Christian Era that mutilated in any form the
Old Testament scriptures. But let us not take too narrow a view of
Nephi's vision-prophecy, concerning the corruption of the word of God,
or the power which he saw corrupting it. It may be that he had in
mind in his vision as much the apostate Jewish church as the apostate
Christian church, and looking upon the question from that view point
we know this: that a century or two before the advent of Christ the
Jews apparently had grown weary of the honorable mission which God had
given to them; namely, that of being his witnesses among the nations
of the earth; and their leading teachers, especially in the two
centuries preceding the coming of the Messiah, were taking every step
that their ingenuity could devise for harmonizing the truths which God
had made known to them with the more fashionable conceptions of God
as entertained by one or the other of the great sects of philosophy
among the Romans. The way had been prepared for the achievement of this
end, in the first place, by the translation of the Hebrew scriptures
into the Greek language (the first great instance of the "Book that
proceedeth forth from the mouth of a Jew" going to the Gentiles), which
version of the Old Testament is usually called the Septuagint, or the
LXX. This latter name is given to it because of a tradition that the
translation was accomplished by seventy, or about seventy, elders of
the Jews. The most generally accepted theory concerning it, however,
is that it was a work accomplished at various time between 280 B. C.
and 150 B. C. The books of Moses being first translated as early as the
time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, 284-264 B. C., while the Prophets and
Psalms were translated somewhat later. It is not, however, the time or
manner in which the translation was accomplished that we are interested
in, but the character of the translation itself; and of this, Alfred
Edersheim, in his "Life and Times of Jesus, the Messiah," in the
division of his work which treats of the preparation for the Gospel,
says of this Greek translation:

    Putting aside clerical mistakes and misreadings, and making
    allowance for errors of translation, ignorance, and haste, we note
    certain outstanding facts as characteristic of the Greek version.
    It bears evident marks of its origin in Egypt, in its use of
    Egyptian works and references, and equally evident traces of its
    Jewish composition. By the side of slavish and false literalism
    there is great liberty, if not license, in handling the original;
    gross mistakes occur along with happy renderings of very difficult
    passages, suggesting the aid of some able scholars. Distinct
    Jewish elements are undeniably there, which can only be explained
    by reference to Jewish tradition, although they are much fewer
    than some critics have supposed. This we can easily understand,
    since only those traditions would find a place which at the early
    time were not only received, but in general circulation. The
    distinctly Grecian elements, however, are at present of chief
    interest to us. They consist of allusion to Greek mythological
    terms, and adaptations of Greek philosophical ideas. However few,
    even one well-authenticated instance would lead us to suspect
    others, and in general give to the version the character of Jewish
    Hellenising. In the same class we reckon what constitutes the
    prominent characteristics of the LXX version, which, for want of
    better terms, we would designate as rationalistic and apologetic.
    Difficulties--or what seemed such--are removed by the most bold
    methods, and by free handling of the text; it need scarcely be
    said, often very unsatisfactorily. More especially, a strenuous
    effort is made to banish all anthropomorphisms, as inconsistent
    with their ideas of the Deity. [46]

Later the same authority points out the fact that the Septuagint
version of the Hebrew scriptures became really the people's Bible to
that large Jewish world through which Christianity was afterwards to
address itself to mankind. "It was part of the case," he adds, "that
this translation should be regarded by the Hellenists as inspired like
the original. Otherwise it would have been impossible to make final
appeal to the very words of the Greek; still less to find in them a
mystical and allegorical meaning." [47]

The foundation thus laid for a superstructure of false philosophy there
was not wanting builders who were anxious to place a pagan structure
upon it. About the middle of the second century B. C., one Aristobulus,
a Hellenist Jew of Alexandria, sought to so explain the Hebrew
scriptures as "to bring the Peripatetic philosophy out of the law of
Moses, and out of the other Prophets." Following is a sample according
to Edersheim, of his allegorizing:

    Thus, when we read that God stood, it meant the stable order of
    the world; that he created the world in six days, the orderly
    succession of time; the rest of the Sabbath, the preservation of
    what was created. And in such manner could the whole system of
    Aristotle be found in the Bible. But how was this to be accounted
    for? Of course, the Bible had not learned of Aristotle, but he and
    all other philosophers had learned from the Bible. Thus, according
    to Aristobulus, Phythagoras, Plato, and all the other sages, had
    really learned from Moses, and the broken rays found in their
    writings were united in all their glory in the Torah. [48]

Following Aristobulus in the same kind of philosophy was Philo, the
learned Jew of Alexandria, born about the year 20 B. C. He was supposed
to be a descendant of Aaron, and belonged to one of the wealthiest
and most influential families among the merchant Jews of Egypt; and
he is said to have united a large share of Greek learning with Jewish
enthusiasm. He followed most earnestly in the footsteps of Aristobulus.
According to him, all the Greek sages had learned their philosophy from
Moses, in whom alone was all truth to be found. "Not indeed, in the
letter," says Edersheim, "but under the letter of Holy Scripture. If in
Numbers xxiii: 19 we read 'God is not a man,' and in Deut. i:31 that
the Lord was 'as a man,' did it not imply on the one hand revelation
of absolute truth by God, and on the other, accommodation to those who
were weak? Here then, was the principle of a two-fold interpretation
of the word of God--the literal and the allegorical. * * * * * * To
begin with the former: the literal sense must be wholly set aside,
when it implies anything unworthy of the Deity--anything unmeaning,
impossible, or contrary to reason. Manifestly this canon, if strictly
applied, would do away not only with all anthropomorphisms, but cut the
knot where difficulties seemed insuperable. Again, Philo would find an
allegorical, along with the literal, interpretation indicated in the
reduplication of a word, and in seemingly superfluous words, particles,
or expressions. These could, of course, only bear such a meaning on
Philo's assumption of the actual inspiration of the Septuagint version."

When one thinks of the mischief that may arise from such perversions of
scripture by the application of Philo's principles of interpretation,
we do not marvel that some of the Jews regarded the translation of the
Seventy "to have been as great a calamity to Israel as the making of
the golden calf." "The Jews who remained faithful to the traditions
of their race," says Andrew D. White, "regarded this Greek version
as profanation, and therefore there grew up the legend that on the
completion of the work there was darkness over the whole earth during
three days. This showed clearly Jehovah's disapproval." [49]

Referring to the Talmudic canon of interpretation of the Greek
versions, Edersheim says, "they were comparatively sober rules of
exegesis." But "not so," he remarks, "the license which Philo claimed,
of freely altering the punctuation of sentences and his notion that, if
one from among several synonymous words was chosen in a passage, this
pointed to some special meaning attaching to it. Even more extravagant
was the idea that a word which occurred in the Septuagint might be
interpreted according to every shade of meaning which it bore in the
Greek, and that even another meaning might be given it by slightly
altering the letters."

In all this one may see only too plainly the effort to harmonize Jewish
theology with Greek philosophy--an effort to be rid of the plain
anthropomorphism of the Hebrew scriptures, for the incomprehensible
"being" of Greek metaphysics.

Thus not only is it evident that books are omitted from the Hebrew
scriptures, but by faulty translations and by false interpretations the
pure stream of God's revelation has been corrupted. In pointing out the
purposes for which the Book of Mormon was written, I said, among other
things, that its purpose was to restore to the knowledge of mankind
plain and precious truths concerning the Gospel which men have taken
out of the Jewish scriptures, or obscured by their interpretations.
And this I insist it does, and in proof of the assertion refer to the
many great truths mentioned in the preceding chapter; those truths
concerning the purpose of Adam's fall; the object of man's earth-life,
the doctrine of opposite existences and the whole scheme of the
Gospel. To these I may add, also, that the Book of Mormon reaffirms
and by reaffirming authoritatively restores the great truth of the
anthropomorphism of God. That is, it affirms that in form God is like
man; or, in other words, and in a better form of the comparison man was
created in the image or likeness of God. It restores also the great
truth of the anthropopathy of God. That is to say, in mental, moral,
and spiritual attributes God is like man; or, more correctly speaking,
man is the offspring of Deity, and possesses the mind attributes of
God, differing only in the degree of their development. Man is of the
same race as God--the offspring of Deity. This is not taught in any
formal manner, but is to be learned from the whole tenor of the book.

With reference to the form of God, the Book of Mormon has two very
important and very emphatic passages on the subject. The first Nephi,
in a great vision given to him of the future, was attended by a spirit
who gave him explanations, as the several parts of his vision passed
before him. And now Nephi's account:

    And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me, Look! and I
    looked, and beheld a tree; * * * and the beauty thereof was far
    beyond, yea, exceeding all beauty, and the whiteness thereof did
    exceed the whiteness of the driven snow. And it came to pass after
    I had seen the tree, I said unto the Spirit, I behold thou hast
    shown unto me the tree, which is precious above all. And he said
    unto me: What desirest thou? And I said unto him: To know the
    interpretation thereof; for I spake unto him as a man speaketh; for
    I beheld that he was in the form of a man; yet, nevertheless, I
    knew that it was the Spirit of the Lord; and he spake unto me as a
    man speaketh with another. [50]

The second passage alluded to is found in the book of Ether. The
prophet Moriancumr, the brother of Jared, when about to depart with his
colony in barges across the great deep, had prepared certain stones
which he prayed the Lord to make luminous, that they might have light
in the barges while on their journey. He had approached the Lord with
great faith, and expressed full confidence in the power of God to do
the thing for which he prayed; and now the Book of Mormon statement of
the matter:

    And it came to pass that when the brother of Jared had said these
    words, behold the Lord stretched forth his hand and touched the
    stones, one by one with his finger; and the veil was taken from
    off the eyes of the brother of Jared, and he saw the finger of the
    Lord; and it was as the finger of a man, like unto flesh and blood;
    and the brother of Jared fell down before the Lord, for he was
    struck with fear. * * * And the Lord said unto him, Arise, why hast
    thou fallen? And he said unto the Lord, I saw the finger of the
    Lord, and I feared lest he should smite me; for I knew not that the
    Lord had flesh and blood. And the Lord said unto him, Because of
    thy faith thou hast seen that I shall take upon me flesh and blood;
    and never has man come before me with such exceeding faith as
    thou hast; for were it not so, you could not have seen my finger.
    * * * And when he had said these words, behold, the Lord shewed
    himself unto him, and said, Because thou knowest these things you
    are redeemed from the fall; therefore you are brought back into my
    presence; therefore I shew myself unto you. Behold, I am he who
    was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people.
    Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall
    all mankind have light, and that eternally, even they who shall
    believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters.
    And never have I shewed myself unto man whom I have created, for
    never has man believed in me as thou hast. Seest thou that thou art
    created after mine own image? Yea, even all men were created in
    the beginning, after mine own image. Behold, this body, which you
    now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after
    the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the
    spirit, will I appear unto my people in the flesh. [51]

The following passages, when combined, may be regarded as a further
revelation of the truth here set forth: III. Nephi xi: 24, 25, xxvii:
27, xxviii: 10, I. Nephi xi: 8-11, and Ether iii: 6-16. [52]


_No Gentile Kings in America_.

The prophet Jacob, brother of the first Nephi, addressing himself to
the Nephites, said:

    Behold, this land, saith God, shall be a land of thine inheritance,
    and the Gentiles shall be blessed upon the land. And this land
    shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be
    no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles;
    and I will fortify this land against all other nations; and he
    that fighteth against Zion shall perish, saith God; for he that
    raiseth up a king against me shall perish, for I, the Lord, the
    King of heaven, will be their king, and I will be a light unto them
    forever, that hear my words. [53]

There are many decrees of God concerning America as a choice
land, which will be noted in the place I have assigned for their
consideration, but here I am concerned only with this remarkable
prophecy, viz., that the land of America (both continents) is
consecrated to liberty, and there shall be no kings upon the land "who
shall rise up unto the Gentiles." Note the limits of the prophecy. It
is not extended to the native races of America, but to the Gentiles who
shall inhabit the land. That is to say, there shall be no kings upon
the land "who shall rise up unto the Gentiles."

A rather bold prediction this, whether the utterances he accredited to
Jacob, in the first half of the 5th century B. C., or to Joseph Smith
in 1830. In any event the prophecy, so far, has been fulfilled; and
today from the frozen north, Alaska, to the straits of Magellan in the
south continent, the "new world" under the consecration of God, is
blessed with freedom, and republican, not monarchial, institutions,

It may be objected that this prophecy has failed because of two
notable attempts to establish monarchies in the New World by European
governments, one in Brazil, the other in Mexico. Let us investigate
these two attempts.

By an accidental discovery along the east shore of South America, by
Cabral, a Portuguese navigator, (1500 A. D.,) that section of the south
continent now known to us as Brazil, became a colony of the kingdom of
Portugal. It remained so until 1822, when Dom Pedro, the son of King
John VI., of Portugal, sided with the people of Brazil in declaring the
independence of the country, and was crowned Emperor under the title of
Dom Pedro I.

His rule, however, was tyrranical, and the people at length rose against
him, in 1831, dragged him to the public square of Rio de Janeiro and
forced him to remove from his head the imperial crown, and thus his
reign ended in public disgrace.

His son became emperor under the title of Dom Pedro II. As he was a
child of but six years when his father abdicated in his favor, Brazil
was governed by regents until 1841, when the Prince, having attained
his majority, was proclaimed emperor. It is said of him that from the
first he proved himself an intelligent, liberal and humane ruler, and
during his reign Brazil made great advancement in civilization and
material prosperity. He was so strongly attached to constitutional
forms, and governed so entirely through his ministers, that he can
scarcely be regarded as a monarch at all. In November, 1889, he
acquiesced in the wishes of the people, abdicated his throne in favor
of a republican form of government, and retired to Portugal. Since that
time Brazil has remained a republic.

The attempts to establish monarchy in Mexico arose under the following
circumstances: In 1862, France, Great Britain, and Spain sent a joint
military expedition to Mexico to enforce payment of certain claims.
When their ostensible object was attained Great Britain and Spain
withdrew; but Napoleon III, Emperor of France, confident that the war
between the states of the American Union would end in dissolution of
the Union, regarded the conditions as favorable to the establishment
of a Latin empire in the Western world which he hoped would be a
counterpoise to the Anglo Saxon republics; and invited Archduke
Maximilian, brother of the Austrian Emperor, to accept the crown of
the proposed new government, Napoleon promising to maintain an army
of twenty-five thousand French soldiers for his protection. This
proposition the Archduke accepted, and was hailed emperor of Mexico.

Meantime the United States government refused to recognize any
authority in Mexico except that of the deposed President of the
Republic, Juarez; but in consequence of the civil war then at its
heighth was unable to resist this flagrant violation of the Monroe
Doctrine. [54] The civil war closed, however, notice was served upon the
French emperor that his soldiers must be withdrawn from Mexico, and
he judged it expedient to comply, though it was a dastardly desertion
of Maximilian, whose situation at once became precarious. In vain his
faithful consort, Carlotta, journeyed from court to court in Europe
intreating assistance for her husband, and denouncing Napoleon's
dissertion of him. Her successive disappointments finally overthrew her
reason. No hand in Europe was raised to maintain monarchy in Mexico.
Juarez, the deposed President of the republic of Mexico, made short
work of the empire. He captured Maximilian, and had him shot as a
usurper, June 19, 1867. The event cast a gloom over all Europe, but no
king nor potentate sought to avenge the execution. May it not be that
those nations were as much awed, though unconsciously, by the spirit of
the decree of God concerning the land of America, as by the policy of
the government of the United States laid down in the Monroe Doctrine?
And, indeed, may not the Monroe Doctrine itself be regarded as a
heaven-inspired decree by a competent national agency to make of effect
the old Nephite prophecy, "there shall be no kings on this land?"
"The French empire," says Ekwin A. Grosvenor, professor of European
History in Amherst College, and author of "Contemporary History of
the World"--"The French empire never recovered from the shock of this
Mexican failure."

The Emperor, Napoleon III, engaged in a war with Germany in 1870, in
which himself and France suffered the most humiliating defeat ever
inflicted on a modern state or its ruler. He himself was captured at
the surrender of Sedan and imprisoned for sometime at Wilhelmshohe,
near Cassel. Meantime he was deposed by the French people who
established a Republican form of government, in place of the Empire.
Some two years after his imprisonment he died an exile at Chiselhurst,
England. The Empress, Eugenie, was also forced into exile and was for
same years the guest of England. On June 1, 1879, Napoleon's son,
Imperial, the only son of the Emperor, was killed by the Zulus in south
Africa, thus blotting out, we may say, the entire family of the French
Monarch, and fulfilling in a marked manner the terms of this prophecy:
"And he that raiseth up a King against me shall perish."

The foregoing attempts in Brazil and Mexico to found monarchies in the
New World cannot properly be regarded as proving the failure of the
Book of Mormon prophecy. The monarchies existed for a short time only,
and were so precarious while they lasted, and ended so disastrously
for those making the attempt to establish them, that they emphasize
the force of the prophecy rather than prove its failure. They are as
slight exceptions tending to prove a rule. It is not said in the Book
of Mormon that attempts would not be made to set up kings, but that
such attempts should end disastrously for those making them; and that
no kings should be established, that is permanently established, in the
new world. Surely no candid mind will read this prophecy and consider
all the facts involved in the attempts to establish monarchies in
America, but will say that they have ended disastrously, and that this
prophecy has been verily fulfilled.


1. Vol. I, Chapter xx.

2. "There is more solid proof in favor of a prophet being divinely sent
when his words are fulfilled than in all the miracles he can work."
(Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. X., 194.) "Prophecies
are permanent miracles, whose authority is sufficiently confirmed by
their completion, and are therefore solid proofs of the supernatural
origin of a religion, of whose truth they were intended to testify:
such are those to be found in various parts of the scriptures relative
to the coming of the Messiah, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the
unexampled state in which the Jews have ever since continued--all
so circumstantially descriptive of the events that they seem rather
histories of past than predictions of future transactions," Soame
Jenyns, "A View of the Internal Evidence of the Christian Religion," p.

3. Ether xiii.

4. Omni i: 19-22.

5. The matter is dealt with more at length in Volume I., Chapter xx.

6. Moroni x: 4, 5.

7. John vii: 16, 17.

8. So confident was President Brigham Young in the matter of the Holy
Spirit bearing witness to the truth of the Book of Mormon that on one
ocassion he said: "Nothing short of the Holy Ghost will do us any
lasting good. I told you, in the beginning of my remarks, the truth as
it is in heaven and on earth, as it is with angels, and with prophets,
with all good people, and with every sinner that dwells upon the earth.
There is not a man or woman who on hearing the report of the Book of
Mormon but the spirit of the Almighty has testified to them of its
truth; neither have they heard the name of Joseph Smith but the spirit
has whispered to them, 'He is the true Prophet.' It is the spirit
which is invisible to the natural mind of man, that produces effects
apparently without causes, and creates mysteries, marvels, and wonders
in the earth. These things we behold, but we cannot with the natural
mind account for them, nor divine their ultimate end." (A discourse by
President Young, delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, June 13,
1852, "Deseret News." Vol. 4, No. 6.)

9. Matt. iii: 16; John i: 32-34.

10. I. Cor. xii: 3.

11. John xv: 26.

12. John xiv.

13. John xvi.

14. I. Nephi xiii: 35-37.

15. "Leaves from My Journal," Edition of 1909, pp. 84, 85.

16. F. D. Richards, Church Historian, in a sketch of the life of
Wilford Woodruff, "Improvement Era," Vol. I, p. 871.

17. "Leaves from My Journal," Edition of 1909, pp. 88, 89.

18. "Leaves from My Journal," Edition of 1909, pp. 95, 96.

19. "Life of Heber C. Kimball," Orson F. Whitney, p. 402, 403.

20. "Life of Heber C. Kimball" (Whitney), pp. 34, 35.

21. St. John xvi: 13.

22. "My First Mission," p. 23.

23. Chapter xvi.

24. Ibid, chapter xviii.

25. Ibid, chapters xx, xxi, xxii, xxiii of "New Witnesses," Vol. I.

26. Ibid, chapter xxiv.

27. II. Nephi xxvii: 12, 13.

28. Ether v: 3.

29. II. Nephi xxviii: 2-14.

30. Mormon viii.

31. Church History, Vol. I, chapter xxxi.

32. History of the Church, Vol. III, chapter xii.

33. Ibid, chapter xiii. Seventeen were killed outright, twelve were
savagely wounded. All that were killed had to be hurriedly thrown into
an old well and buried without ceremony.

34. II. Nephi xxix: 1-3.

35. See New Witnesses, Vol. I, chapter viii; also Vol. II., ch. xxxvii,
and notes.

36. Those who would have further evidence upon the subject are
referred to all the early controversial literature of the Church, and
especially to a Public Discussion between Elder John Taylor and three
sectarian ministers in France, which "Discussion" is published with
the early editions of Orson Pratt's works, and in which, among other
similar passages occurs the following: "Rev. Mr. Carter. But the great
consideration is, that these persons (Mormon Elders) pretend to add to;
and supercede the Word of God. Now the Bible is the sheet-anchor of
Christians, and it neither needs the Book of Mormon nor any other book,
nor the assistance of Joe Smith or any other Joe. The awful voice of
prophecy has spoken for the last time, and the cause of inspiration is

37. Evidences of Christianity, p. 352.

38. II. Nephi xxix: 7-14.

39. Acts x: 34, 35.

40. The teacher alluded to is Frederick Denison Maurice, Professor of
Modern Philosophy in the University of Cambridge. I feel much indebted
to this teacher myself, and cannot recommend too highly, I am sure, his
"History of Moral and Metaphysical Philosophy," two volumes, London,
Macmillan & Co., 1872.

41. I. Nephi xiii: 24-29.

42. See "Golden Bible" (Lamb), Appendix "A," pp. 323-340.

43. I. Nephi xiv: 10.

44. Upon this subject I have elsewhere said: "The church of the
devil" here alluded to, I understand to mean not any particular
church among men, or any one sect of religion, but something larger
than that--something that includes within its boundaries all evil
wherever it may be found; as well in schools of philosophy as in
Christian sects; as well in systems of ethics as in systems of
religion--something that includes the whole empire of Satan--what I
shall call "The Kingdom of Evil." * * The question was once submitted
to me, "Is the Catholic church the church here referred to--the church
of the devil?" "Well," said I, in answer, "I would not like to take
that position, because it would leave me with a lot of churches on
my hands that I might not then be able to classify." So far as the
Catholic church is concerned, I believe that there is just as much
truth, nay, personally I believe she has retained even more truth
than other divisions of so-called Christendom; and there is just as
much virtue in the Roman Catholic church as there is in Protestant
Christendom; and I am sure there is more strength. I would not like,
therefore, to designate the Catholic church as the church of the
devil. Neither would I like to designate any one or all of the various
divisions and subdivisions of Protestant Christendom combined as such
church; nor the Greek Catholic church; nor the Buddhist sects; nor the
followers of Confucius; nor the followers of Mohammed; nor would I
like to designate even the societies formed by deists and atheists as
constituting the church of the devil. The Book of Mormon text ought to
be read in connection with its context--with the chapter that precedes
it and the remaining portions of the chapter in which the expression is
found--then, I think, those who study it in that manner will be forced
to the conclusion that the prophet here has in mind no particular
church, no particular division of Christendom, but he has in mind, as
just stated, the whole empire of Satan, and perhaps the thought of the
passage would be more nearly expressed if we use the term "the Kingdom
of Evil" as constituting the church of the devil. "(Defense of the
Faith and the Saints," Vol. I, pp. 30-31.)

45. Such is Lamb's argument on this point. "Golden Bible," p. 325.

46. "Jesus, the Messiah," By Edersheim, Vol. I., pp. 27-8, eighth

47. Ibid, p. 29.

48. Ibid, p. 36.

49. "A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology," Vol. II, pp.
289, 290. By the way, may not this tradition about the three days'
darkness over the whole earth at the completion of this regarded
profanation of the Jewish scriptures, when they thus went forth for the
first time to the Gentiles, be a misapplication of the prediction which
Nephi declares was spoken of by the old Jewish prophet Zenos--whose
works Lehi's colony carried with them into the wilderness--whom Nephi
declares "spake concerning the three days of darkness which should
be a sign of his [Messiah's] death unto those who should inhabit the
isles of the sea" (I. Nephi xix: 10)? May not the matter referred to
by Professor White be an interpretation of this old Jewish prophecy
concerning the three days of darkness?

50. I. Nephi xi: 8-11.

51. Ether iii: 6-16.

52. See collection of passages in the author's "Mormon Doctrine of
Deity," pp. 213-217.

53. II. Nephi x: 10-14.

54. This "Monroe Doctrine" derives its name from a message sent to
Congress by President James Monroe, in 1823, in the course of which he
said: "The American continents, by the free and independent condition
which they had assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be
considered as subjects for future colonization by any European power."
He further declared that any attempt by a European power to oppress
or control an independent American nation would be regarded as "the
manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United states."



The first Nephi, speaking of his people in the fifth century B. C.,
makes a number of prophecies respecting things that shall take place
in the last days, following the coming forth of the scriptures of his
people [i. e. the Book of Mormon] to the Gentiles. These predictions
are found on one page of the Book of Mormon; and are at once so
numerous and of such high import as to make that page unique in
prophetic literature. With one exception, viz., the vision of Daniel,
recorded in the second chapter of his prophecies, which deals with the
succession of the several great earth-empires, I do not believe an
equal number of prophecies of such high importance can be found within
the whole range of prophetic literature in the same amount of space,
and I here reproduce that page as it stands in the current editions of
the Book of Mormon:


    3. And now, I would prophesy somewhat more concerning the Jews and
    the Gentiles. For after the book of which I have spoken shall come
    forth, and be written unto the Gentiles and sealed up again unto
    the Lord, there shall be many which shall believe the words which
    are written; and they shall carry them forth unto the remnant of
    our seed.

    4. And then shall the remnant of our seed know concerning us, how
    that we came out from Jerusalem, and that they are descendants of
    the Jews.

    5. And the gospel of Jesus Christ shall be declared among them;
    wherefore, they shall be restored unto the knowledge of their
    fathers, and also to the knowledge of Jesus Christ, which was had
    among their fathers.

    6. And then shall they rejoice; for they shall know that it is
    a blessing unto them from the hand of God; and their scales
    of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and not many
    generations shall pass away among them, save they shall be a white
    and a delightsome people.

    7. And it shall come to pass that the Jews which are scattered,
    also shall begin to believe in Christ; and they shall begin to
    gather in upon the face of the land; and as many as shall believe
    in Christ shall also become a delightsome people.

    8. And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall commence his
    work among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and peoples, to bring
    about the restoration of his people upon the earth.

    9. And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and
    reprove with equity, for the meek of the earth. And he shall smite
    the earth with the rod of his mouth; and with the breath of his
    lips shall he slay the wicked;

    10. For the time speedily cometh, that the Lord God shall cause a
    great division among the people; and the wicked will he destroy:
    and he will spare his people, yea, even if it so be that he must
    destroy the wicked by fire.

    11. And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and
    faithfulness the girdle of his reins. [1]

A few lines extending on the next page completes the picture of peace
and happiness that shall ultimately be diffused over the earth in that

    12. And then shall the wolf dwell with the lamb, and the leopard
    shall lie down with the kid; and the calf, and the young lion, and
    the fatling, together; and a little child shall lead them.

    13. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie
    down together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

    14. And the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp, and
    the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice's den.

    15. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for
    the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters
    cover the sea. [2]

Let us now consider this prophetic page item by item.


_Many Shall Believe the Words of the Book_.

    For after the book of which I have spoken [i. e. the Book of
    Mormon] shall come forth and be written unto the Gentiles and
    sealed up again unto the Lord, there shall be many which shall
    believe the words which are written.

Whether this declaration be accredited to the first Nephi, five hundred
years B. C., or allowed no other authorship than Joseph Smith, and no
greater antiquity than 1830, when the Book of Mormon was published,
it is equally prophetic in character. And if it be insisted upon that
it had no earlier origin than Joseph Smith's utterance of it, then
it becomes all the more remarkable as a prophecy; for by the time it
was put forth by him, he had very good reason--human reason--to doubt
if the Book of Mormon would be extensively believed, or believed in
at all; for by this time such opposition had appeared against it,
and such ridicule and derision heaped upon himself and associates;
and everywhere there had been such a manifestation of opposition to
the forth-coming book, that naturally one would wonder if it would
be overwhelmed by a universal ignoring of it. Still there stands the

    There shall be many which shall believe the words which are written.

The only question is, Has it been fulfilled? In answer we have only
to point to the present membership of the Church in all the world,
say three hundred thousand people. But to the number of those who now
believe it, and hold it to be a volume of sacred scripture, there must
be added all those who have died in the faith; and again those who once
accepted it in their faith and afterwards, by transgression, lost the
spirit of the work and departed from the Church; but who, singularly
enough, in the majority of cases, still continued to assert their faith
in the truth of the Book of Mormon. And then to all those numbers there
must be added that still greater number of people who have been brought
to a belief in the Book of Mormon, but who have not had sufficient
moral courage to forfeit their good standing among their fellows, and
make other sacrifices involved in a public profession of their faith.

Let the numbers of these several classes be added together and beyond
question the prophecy has been fulfilled. Many have believed in the
Nephite scriptures.

As a further instance of the wide acceptation of the Book of Mormon,
it should be mentioned that it has passed through many editions in
the English language, both in America and England; and has also been
translated into and published in the following languages: French,
German, Danish, Italian, Dutch, Welch, Swedish, Spanish, Hawaiian,
Maori, Greek and Japanese.


_The Book of Mormon to be Taken to the American Indians--"and They
Shall Rejoice_."

Following the declaration that "many shall believe the words which are
written" is the statement, "and they shall carry them forth [the words
of the ancient Nephites] unto the remnant of our seed." That is to the
remnant of the seed of Lehi, the American Indians. And then follows

    And then shall the remnant of our seed know concerning us, how that
    we came out from Jerusalem, and that they are descendants of the
    Jews. [3]

    And the gospel of Jesus Christ, shall be declared among them,
    wherefore, they shall be restored unto the knowledge of their
    fathers, and also to the knowledge of Jesus Christ, which was had
    among their fathers.

    And then shall they rejoice; for they shall know that it is a
    blessing unto them from the hand of God; and their scales of
    darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations
    shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and
    delightsome people.

Here we stand in the midst of prophecies. By which I mean that some of
the predictions have been fulfilled, and others are yet to be fulfilled
in the future, and involve the coming to pass of very remarkable
events. Before calling attention to the parts that have been fulfilled
I cite the prophecies under this subdivision as evidence against the
claim that is sometimes made against the Book of Mormon, that all its
prophetic parts end about the time the Book of Mormon came forth, viz.,
in 1830. The prophecies that many shall believe the book; that they
shall carry its messages to the American Indians; that the Indians
shall rejoice in the things the book makes known to them; that not
many generations from that time the Indians shall become "a white and
delightsome people"--as also indeed the prophecies relating to the
Jews--all concern events that are to take place subsequent to the year

But now to take up the several prophecies being treated together under
this sub-title II.

The "many" who believe the Book of Mormon, according to the prophecy,
are to carry it forth unto the remnant of Lehi's people, the American
Indians. It is notorious that they have done so. The Church had been
organized but six months when in fulfillment of a divine appointment [4]
a mission was sent to the Lamanites consisting of Oliver Cowdery, Peter
Whitmer, Jun., Parley P. Pratt, and Ziba Peterson. On returning from
that mission Elder Pratt, after recounting their travels through the
western states of the American Union, gives the following summary of
what was done: "Thus ended our first mission in which we had preached
the Gospel in its fulness and distributed the records of their
forefathers among three tribes, viz., the Catteraugus Indians, near
Buffalo, N. Y.; the Wyandots, of Ohio; and the Delawares, west of the
Missouri." [5]

Since that time numerous missions have been undertaken among the
Indians which have met with more or less success. Since the Church
has been located in the Rocky Mountains various tribes have been
visited by the Apostles and other Elders, and some success has been
attained in colonizing Indians and teaching them the ways and arts
of civilization. Some success has also attended the preaching of the
Gospel among the natives in Mexico; and similar efforts, though as yet
unfruitful, have been made in some of the states of Central America.
It is more than likely that the Sandwich Islanders are descendants of
Nephite colonists who went from America to the Hawaiian Islands, about
the time of Hagoth's migrations in ships from the shores of the land
Bountiful--near where the isthmus of Panama joins the South American
continent. Their traditions and racial peculiarities all favor this
view; and if our supposition be true, then the success of preaching
the gospel to the descendants of the Nephites has been considerably
augmented, for a number of thousands of these islanders have embraced
the gospel, some of whom have gathered to the stakes of Zion, and
others have been established in a prosperous colony in their own land.

While success in bringing the native American race to a knowledge of
their forefathers and an acceptance of the written work of God revealed
to their forefathers has been limited, yet it has been sufficiently
extensive to fulfill the terms of the Book of Mormon prophecies, and
certainly sufficient to create the most sanguine belief in a further
fulfillment of it.

"Then shall they rejoice." This declaration, of course, indicates that
the native American races would believe the message of the Book of
Mormon; and so indeed they have, as is witnessed by the fact of many of
them joining the Church of the Latter-day Saints.

In his account of the first mission to the Indians, Elder Parley P.
Pratt gives the substance of an address of Oliver Cowdery's to the
chief of the Delaware tribe of Indians, and the leading men of the
tribe, who had assembled to hear the message which the missionaries had
to deliver; Elder Pratt also gives the substance of the chief's reply,
in which the latter especially expresses his gladness [6] at the message
delivered to them. Elder Pratt represents the Chief as saying:

    We feel truly thankful to our white friends who have come so far
    and been at such pains to tell us good news, and especially this
    new news concerning the Book of our forefathers; it makes us glad
    in here"--placing his hand on his heart. "It is now winter; we
    are new settlers in this place; the snow is deep; our cattle and
    horses are dying; our wigwams are poor; we have much to do in the
    spring--to build houses and fence and make farms; but we will build
    a council house and meet together, and you shall read to us and
    teach us more concerning the Book of our fathers, and the will of
    the Great Spirit. [7]

During the sojourn of the Church at Nauvoo representatives of several
tribes of Indians called upon the Prophet Joseph from time to time. One
notable instance was the visit of a number of Pottawatamie chiefs in
the summer of 1843, of which visit the Prophet in his journal gives the
following brief account:

    I had an interview with several Pottawatamie chiefs, who came to
    see me during my absence. [8]

Elder Woodruff's journal gives the following more elaborate account of
this event:

    The Indian chiefs remained at Nauvoo until the Prophet returned
    and had his trial. During their stay they had a talk with Hyrum
    Smith, in the basement of the Nauvoo House. Wilford Woodruff and
    some others were present. They were not free to talk, and did not
    wish to communicate their feelings until they could see the great

    At length, on the 2nd day of July, 1843, President Joseph Smith
    and several of the Twelve met those chiefs in the courtroom with
    about thirty of the Elders. The following is a synopsis of the
    conversation which took place as given by the interpreter:

    The Indian orator arose and asked the Prophet if the men who were
    present were all his friends. Answer, "Yes."

    He then said: "As a people we have long been distressed and
    oppressed. We have been driven from our lands many times. We have
    been wasted away by wars, until there are but few of us left. The
    white man has hated us and shed our blood, until it has appeared
    as though there would soon be no Indians left. We have talked with
    the Great Spirit, and the Great Spirit has talked with us. We have
    asked the Great Spirit to save us and let us live, and the Great
    Spirit has told us that he had raised up a great Prophet, chief,
    and friend, who would do us great good and tell us what to do; and
    the Great Spirit has told us that you are the man (pointing to the
    Prophet Joseph). We have now come a great way to see you, and hear
    your words, and to have you tell us what to do. Our horses have
    become poor traveling, and we are hungry. We will now wait and hear
    your words."

    The Spirit of God rested upon the Lamanites, especially [upon]
    the orator. Joseph was much affected and shed tears. He arose and
    said unto them: "I have heard your words. They are true. The Great
    Spirit has told you the truth. I am your friend and brother, and I
    wish to do you good. Your fathers were once a great people. They
    worshiped the Great Spirit. The Great Spirit did them good. He was
    their friend; but they left the Great Spirit, and would not hear
    his words or keep them. The Great Spirit left them, and they began
    to kill one another, and they have been poor and afflicted until

    "The Great Spirit has given me a book, and told me that you will
    soon be blessed again. The Great Spirit will soon begin to talk
    with you and your children. This is the book which your fathers
    made. I wrote upon it (showing them the Book of Mormon). This tells
    me what you will have to do. I now want you to begin to pray to the
    Great Spirit. I want you to make peace with one another, and do not
    kill any more Indians; it is not good. Do not kill white men; it is
    not good; but ask the Great Spirit for what you want, and it will
    not be long before the Great Spirit will bless you, and you will
    cultivate the earth and build good houses, like white men. We will
    give you something to eat and [something] to take home with you."

    When the Prophet's words were interpreted to the chiefs, they all
    said it was good. The chief asked, "How many moons it would be
    before the Great Spirit would bless them?" He [the Prophet] told
    them, "Not a great many."

    At the close of the interview, Joseph had an ox killed for them,
    and they were furnished with some more horses, and they went home
    satisfied and contented. [9]

One other thing in these several prophecies should be observed, the
very emphatic implication that the native American race will persist.
The prevailing idea, however, is quite to the contrary. I may say
it is the universal opinion that the native American race is doomed
to extinction; and, in fact, that it is now on the high way to that
finality. Against such general opinion, however, the Book of Mormon
utters the surprising declaration not only that the American race shall
not become extinct, but that fallen as its fortunes are, and degraded
as it is, yet shall it become, and that before many generations pass
away, "a white and delightsome people!" Than this declaration I can
think of nothing more boldly prophetic, nor of any inspired utterance
which so squarely sets itself against all that is accepted as the
probabilities in the case. But with complete confidence we await the
time of the fulfillment of God's decree; of its signal triumph over the
opinions of men.


_The Jews Shall Begin to Believe in Christ, and to Gather_.

    And it shall come to pass that the Jews which are scattered also
    shall begin to believe in Christ; and they shall begin to gather in
    upon the face of the land; and as many as shall believe in Christ
    shall also become a delightsome people.

There was nothing in the affairs of the Jews in the early decades of
the 19th century that would lead any one to suppose that there was to
be any marked change in the sentiments of that people towards Jesus of
Nazareth; or that the time had come when there would be any disposition
on their part to assemble upon the land of their forefathers--which is
evidently meant by part of the prophecy just quoted. Yet the prophecy
immediately before us makes both these astounding predictions; and,
what is more to the point, both are now in progress of fulfillment.
First let us consider the change which the Jewish mind is undergoing
respecting Jesus of Nazareth.

To show the sentiment quite prevalent among the Jews during the life
time of the Prophet Joseph, and to show that he was quite aware of its
existence, I quote an entry from his journal under date of May, 1839.

"Tuesday, May 21, 1839.--To show the feeling of that long scattered
branch of the House of Israel, the Jews, I here quote a letter
written by one of their number, on hearing that his son had embraced


    Breslau, May 21st, 1839. My Dear Son--I received the letter of the
    Berlin Rabbi, and when I read it there ran tears out of my eyes in
    torrents; my inward parts shook, my heart became as a stone! Now do
    you not know that the Lord sent me already many hard tribulations?
    That many sorrows do vex me? But this new harm which you are about
    to inflict makes me forget all the former, does horribly surpass
    them; as well respecting its sharpness as its stings! I write you
    lying on my bed, because my body is embraced not less than my
    soul, at the report that you were about to do something which I had
    not expected from you. I fainted; my nerves and feelings sank, and
    only by the help of a physician, for whom I sent immediately, am I
    able to write these lines to you with a trembling hand.

    Alas! you, my son, whom I have bred, nourished and fostered; whom I
    have strengthened spiritually as well as bodily, you will commit a
    crime on me! Do not shed the innocent blood of your parents, for no
    harm have we inflicted upon you; we are not conscious of any guilt
    against you, but at all times we thought it our duty to show to
    you, our first born, all love and goodnesss. I though I should have
    some cheering account of you, but, alas! how terribly I have been

    But to be short; your outward circumstances are such that you
    may finish your study or [suffer] pain. Do you think that the
    Christians, to whom you will go over by changing your religion,
    will support you and fill up the place of our fellow believers? Do
    not imagine that your outward reasons, therefore, if you have any,
    are nothing. But out of true persuasion, you will, as I think, not
    change our true and holy doctrine, for that deceitful, untrue and
    perverse doctrine of Christianity.

    What! will you give us a pearl for that which is nothing, which
    is of no value in itself? But you are light-minded; think of the
    last judgment; of that day when the books will be opened and hidden
    things will be made manifest; of that day when death will approach
    you in a narrow pass; when you cannot go out of the way! Think of
    your death bed, from which you will not rise any more, but from
    which you be called before the judgment seat of the Lord!

    Do you not know, have you not heard, that there is over you an
    all-hearing ear and an all-seeing eye? That all your deeds will be
    written in a book and judged hereafter? Who shall then assist you
    when the Lord will ask you with a thundering voice, Why hast thou
    forsaken that holy law which shall have an eternal value; which was
    given by my servant Moses, and no man shall change it? Why hast
    thou forsaken that law, and accepted instead of it lying and vanity?

    Come, therefore, again to yourself, my son! remove your bad and
    wicked counselors; follow my advice, and the Lord will be with you!
    Your tender father must conclude because of weeping.

    A. L. LANDAU, Rabbi.

That the sentiments of this letter respecting Jesus and Christianity
are not peculiar to Rabbi Landau, but are representative of the
sentiments of the Hebrew race at that time, I may quote the words of
Dr. Isadore Singer, editor of the "Jewish Encyclopaedia," written in a
letter to George Croly, author of "Tarry Thou Till I Come"--a version
really of the legend of the "Wandering Jew" published in 1901. The
letter here quoted was received from Dr. Singer in reply to one from
the author of "Tarry Thou," asking the question, "What is the Jewish
thought today of Jesus of Nazareth?" Dr. Singer, answered:

    I regard Jesus of Nazareth as a Jew of the Jews, one whom all
    Jewish people are learning to love. His teaching has been an
    immense service to the world in bringing Israel's God to the
    knowledge of hundreds of millions of mankind. The great change
    in Jewish thought concerning Jesus of Nazareth, I cannot better
    illustrate than by this fact:

    When I was a boy, had my father, who was a very pious man, heard
    the name of Jesus uttered from the pulpit of our synagogue, he and
    every other man in the congregation would have left the building,
    and the rabbi would have been dismissed at once. Now, it is not
    strange, in many synagogues, to hear sermons preached eulogistic of
    this Jesus, and nobody thinks of protesting--in fact, we are all
    glad to claim Jesus as one of our people.

    ISADORE SINGER. New York, March 25, 1901.

The question submitted by Mr. Croly to Jewish theologians, historians
and orientalists resulted in quite a large collection of Jewish
opinions of Christ, all of which are published in the appendix of
"Tarry Thou;" and of which the following communications are thoroughly

    The Jew of today beholds in Jesus an inspiring ideal of matchless
    beauty. While he lacks the element of stern justice expressed
    so forcibly in the law and in the Old Testament characters, the
    firmness of self-assertion so necessary to the full development of
    manhood, all those social qualities which build up the home and
    society, industry and worldly progress, he is the unique exponent
    of the principle of redeeming love. His name as helper of the poor,
    as sympathizing friend of the fallen, as brother of every fellow
    sufferer, as lover of man and redeemer of woman, has become the
    inspiration, the symbol and the watchword for the world's greatest
    achievements in the field of benevolence. While continuing the work
    of the synagogue, the Christian church with the larger means at her
    disposal created those institutions of charity and redeeming love
    that accomplished wondrous things. The very sign of the cross has
    lent a new meaning, a holier pathos to suffering, sickness and sin,
    so as to offer new practical solutions for the great problems of
    evil which fill the human heart with new joys of self-sacrificing

    KAUFMAN KOHLER, Ph. D., Rabbi of Temple Beth-El.

    If the Jews up to the present time have not publicly rendered
    homage to the sublime beauty of the figure of Jesus, it is because
    their tormentors have always persecuted, tortured, assassinated
    them in his name. The Jews have drawn their conclusions from the
    disciples as to the Master, which was wrong, a wrong pardonable
    in the eternal victims of the implacable, cruel hatred of those
    who called themselves Christians. Every time that a Jew mounted to
    the sources and contemplated Christ alone, without his pretended
    faithful, he cried with tenderness and admiration: "Putting aside
    the Messianic mission, this man is ours. He honors our race and we
    claim him as we claim the gospels--flowers of Jewish literature and
    only Jewish."

    MAX NORDAU, M. D., Critic and Philosopher. Paris, France.

    The Jews of every shade of religious belief do not regard Jesus
    in the light of Paul's theology. But the gospel of Jesus, the
    Jesus who teaches so superbly the principles of Jewish ethics, is
    revered by all the expounders of Judaism. His words are studied;
    the New Testament forms a part of Jewish literature. Among the
    great preceptors that have worded the truths of which Judaism is
    the historical guardian, none, in our estimation and esteem, takes
    precedence of the rabbi of Nazareth. To impute to us suspicious
    sentiments concerning him does us gross injustice. We know him to
    be among our greatest and purest.

    EMIL G. HIRSCH, Ph. D., LL. D., L. H. D. Rabbi of Sinai
    Congregation, Professor of Rabbinical Literature in Chicago
    University, Chicago, Ill., January 26, 1901.

Later, viz. 1905, Dr. Isadore Singer, himself made such a collection of
Jewish opinions on Jesus, which were published by the "New York Sun,"
and of which the following are typical:

    It is commonly said that the Jews reject Jesus. They did so
    in the sense in which they rejected the teachings of their
    earlier prophets, but the question may be pertinently asked, Has
    Christianity accepted Jesus? The long hoped-for reconciliation
    between Judaism and Christianity will come when once the teachings
    of Jesus shall have become the axioms of human conduct.

    DR. MORRIS JASTROW, Professor of Semitic Languages in the
    University of Pennsylvania.

    I look upon him as a great teacher and reformer, one who aimed
    at the uplifting of suffering humanity, whose every motive was
    kindness, mercy, charity, and justice, and if his wise teaching and
    example have not always been followed the blame should not be his,
    but rather those who have claimed to be his followers.

    SIMON WOLF, President of the Independent Order B'nia B'rith.

    If he had added to their [the Jewish prophets'] spiritual bequests
    new jewels of religious truth, and spoken words which are words of
    life because they touch the deepest springs of the human heart, why
    should we Jews not glory in him? The crown of thorns on his head
    makes him only the more our brother, for to this day it is borne by
    his people. Were he alive today who, think you, would be nearer his
    heart--the persecuted or the persecutors?


The foregoing sentiments do not indicate the acceptance of Jesus by the
Jews at his full value as the Messiah, or as the express revelation
of God to man, or as God manifested in the flesh; but they do give
evidence of a very marked change of sentiment among the Jews toward
Jesus of Nazareth--and surely mark a "beginning" of belief in Christ,
which has but to enlarge to become an acceptance of him as Messiah,
so long expected by their race; and surely they indicate in quite a
remarkable manner the _beginning_ of the fulfillment of the part of the
prophecy here being considered, that declares that "the Jews which are
scattered shall also _begin_ to believe in Christ."

Moreover some few families of Jews have believed the gospel as
presented by the elders of the Church in this dispensation, and are
identified with the Latter-day Saints; among them Alexander Neibaur,
who joined the Church in England in 1840. He afterwards emigrated to
Nauvoo, and the family came with the saints to Utah. Several of his
sons and grand-sons have filled honorable missions for the Church in
preaching the gospel. He is the author of the following well known
hymn, published in the "Times and Seasons," in May, 1841:

  Come, thou glorious day of promise,
  Come and spread thy cheerful ray;
  When the scattered sheep of Israel
  Shall no longer go astray;
  When Hosannas
  With united voice they cry.

  Lord, how long wilt thou be angry?
  Shall thy wrath for ever burn?
  Rise, redeem thine ancient people,
  Their transgressions from them turn.
  King of Israel,
  Come and set thy people free.

  O that soon thou would'st to Jacob
  Thine enliv'ning spirit send;
  Of their unbelief and misery
  Make, O Lord, a speedy end.
  Lord, Messiah,
  Prince of Peace, o'er Israel reign.

  Glory, honour, praise and power,
  Be unto the Lamb for ever;
  Jesus Christ is our Redeemer,
  Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
  Praise ye the Lord!
  Hallelujah! Praise the Lord.


    And the Jews which are scattered * * * shall begin to gather in
    upon the face of the land.

Of course the idea that the Jews will sometime be gathered to the lands
possessed by their forefathers is no new thought. It is not presented
here as such. The Old Testament scriptures are full of predictions
concerning the return of the Jews to Palestine of which the following
are samples:

    And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and
    they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them. [10]

    The house of Jacob shall possess their possessions. [11]

    For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God; the Lord they
    God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all
    people that are upon the face of the earth. [12]

    The Lord shall inherit Judah his portion in the holy land, and
    shall choose Jerusalem again. [13]

    For the Lord will have mercy on Jacob and will yet choose Israel,
    and set them in their own land. [14]

    Thus saith the Lord God: Behold I will take the children of Israel
    from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them
    on every side, and bring them into their own land; and I will
    make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel;
    and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more
    two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any
    more at all: * * * and David, my servant, shall be king over them;
    and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my
    judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. * * * Moreover I
    will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting
    covenant with them: and I will place them and multiply them,
    and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. My
    tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and
    they shall be my people. [15]

The fulfillment of these predictions has been the hope of scattered
Israel, and from time to time societies have been formed to keep
alive such hope as the promises inspired. It may be thought that said
Jewish societies have accomplished but little. But really that little
was much. They nourished in secret and through ages of darkness that
spark of hope, the fire of which, when touched by the breath of God
shall burst forth into a flame that not all the world shall be able to
stay. These efforts in the past have made possible a larger movement
which is now attracting the attention of the world, known as the
"Zionite Movement." In reality this is but the federation of all Jewish
societies that have had for their purpose the realization of the hopes
of scattered Israel.

The Zionite movement proper, however, may be said to have arisen within
very recent years, since it was in 1896 that it held its first general
conference. This at Basel, Switzerland, in August 1896. Since then its
conferences have been held annually and have steadily increased both
in interest and the number of delegates representing various Jewish
societies until now (1905) it takes on the appearance of one of the
world's great movements. It is not so much a religious movement as a
racial one; for prominent Jews of all shades of both political and
religious opinions have participated in it. After saying through so
many centuries at the feast of the Pass Over, "May we celebrate the
next Pass Over in Jerusalem," the thought seemed to have occurred
to some Jewish minds that if that hope was ever to be realized some
practical steps must be taken looking to the actual achievement of the
possibility--hence the "Zionite Movement."

The keynotes of that movement are heard in the following utterances of
some of the Jewish leaders in explanation of it:

    We want to resume the broken thread of our national existence; we
    want to show to the world the moral strength, the intellectual
    power of the Jewish people. We want a place where the race can be


    It tries to restore the old solidarity, the old unity, of Israel;
    not with a view to any mere monetary aggrandizement, but for the
    purpose of securing the right and the opportunity for the Jews to
    live and to develop. It believes that this is possible only if
    there is some spot on earth which the Jews can call their own, and
    which can be a place of refuge, legally secured by international
    obligations, to which the oppressed of Israel may flee whenever
    necessity arises.


    It is for these Jews (of Russia, Roumania and Galicia) that the
    name of their country (Palestine) spells "Hope." I should not be a
    man if I did not realize that for these persecuted Jews, Jerusalem
    spells reason, justice, manhood and liberty.


    Jewish nationalism on a modern basis in Palestine, the old home of
    the people.


    Palestine needs a people; Israel needs a country. Give the country
    without a people to the people without a country.


    To find for the Jews a legally established home in Palestine.


In a word, it is the purpose of "Zionism" to redeem Palestine, and give
it back to Jewish control, create, in fact, a Jewish state in the land
promised to their fathers.

A few years ago negotiations were entered into with the Sultan of
Turkey, within whose political dominions Palestine is included, for
the purchase of the Holy Land for the Jews, and some announcements in
the press by Dr. Herzel, of Austria, just previous to the assembling
of the Zion conference in 1902, for a time justified the high hopes
that were entertained of securing the promised land by purchase. These
hopes, however, were doomed to disappointment by reason of a sudden
change coming over the ruler of Turkey with reference to the matter.
It is more than likely that his advisors persuaded him that the
establishment of a Jewish state under his suzerainty would be adding
one more perplexing feature in the administration of that heterogeneous
collection of such states which already constitute the loose-jointed
empire over which the Sultan presides, by the sufferance of the
European powers. The matter of the Sultan's present refusal to grant,
or sell Palestine to Jews is not a serious difficulty in the progress
of such a wide spread movement as Zionism, however, for ere now the
Lord has changed the hearts of rulers in order to bring to pass his
great purposes, and may do so again. So Israel Zangwill, one of the
most enthusiastic leaders in the movement, views that subject; and in
like spirit also he views the difficulty of obtaining the necessary
millions to purchase the land. On this subject he says:

    It matters little that the Zionists could not pay the millions,
    if suddenly called upon. They have collected not two and a half
    million dollars. But there are millions enough to come to the
    rescue once the charter was dangled before the Zionists. It is
    not likely that the Rothschilds would see themselves ousted from
    their family headship in authority and well-doing. Nor would the
    millions left by Baron Hirsch be altogether withheld. The sultan's
    present refusal is equally unimportant, because a national policy
    is independent of transcient moods and transcient rulers. The only
    aspect that really matters is whether Israel's face be or be not
    set steadily Zionward--for decades, and even for centuries.

An interesting feature at the last Zion conference held in August of
1904, was the tender by the British foreign minister, Lord Landsdowne,
on behalf of the British government of a tract of fertile territory
in Uganda, British East Africa, for the establishment of the Jewish
colony. It is an elevated tract of country extending some two hundred
miles along the Uganda railway, between Man and Nairobi. It is said
to be well watered, fertile, cool, covered with noble forests, almost
uninhabited and as healthful for Europeans as Great Britain. This
tender on the part of the British government was a cause of some
confusion in the Basle conference, and is now a cause of great anxiety
to the Zionists. It is a Jewish state in Palestine, not a colony in
East Africa that the great body of Zionists are looking forward to;
and when it was moved in the conference that a commission of nine be
appointed to look into details and decide upon the advisability of
sending an expedition to investigate the proposed site of the colony,
even this preliminary step was so opposed by the Russian delegates
that they arose en masse and left the conference hall, in protest
against such a movement. The commission, however, was appointed and the
investigation is in progress. Since the close of the Basel conference
many of those interested in the proposition have been searching their
scriptures and some claim to have found prophetic warrant for such a
movement and come to regard the settlement in Africa as a preliminary
to the final movement into Palestine. The prophecies supposed to
justify this view are to be found in the following from Isaiah:

    In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the
    language of Canaan, and swear to the Lord of Hosts; and shall be
    called, the city of destruction.

    In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the
    land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to the Lord.

    And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the Lord of hosts
    in the land of Egypt; for they shall cry unto the Lord because of
    the oppressors, and he shall send them a savior, and a great one,
    and he shall deliver them.

    And the Lord shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know
    the Lord in that day, and shall do sacrifice and oblation; yea,
    they shall vow a vow unto the Lord, and perform it. [16]

Whatever many come of this proposed colony scheme in Africa it can
never be regarded as more than an incident in progress of this great
movement among the Jews. [17] The land of their final inheritance is
Palestine, not Africa, nor Egypt; and if the Jews shall halt for a
time in the land of Uganda, under the benign protection of the British
government, it will be only a temporary abiding place, where, however,
they may obtain a very necessary experience in controlling a state and
bringing their people to a unity of faith and practice under the old
law of Israel.

What I am concerned with in this strange movement among the Jews,
however, is not the details of it, but the fact of it; and the further
fact that "Zionism" is doubtless the inauguration of a series of
movements that shall culminate in the complete fulfillment of this
great Book of Mormon prophecy.

In addition to the prediction of the Book of Mormon which brought the
subject of the gathering of the Jews to their land vividly before the
Prophet Joseph's mind, he claims that in the Kirtland Temple, in 1836,
Moses, the great Hebrew prophet, appeared to himself and Oliver Cowdery
and conferred upon them the keys of the gathering of Israel, and the
power of restoring the tribes to the lands of their fathers. [18] Acting
under the divine authority thus received, Joseph Smith sent an apostle
of the Lord Jesus Christ to the land of Palestine to bless it and
dedicate it to the Lord for the return of his people. This apostle was
Orson Hyde, and he performed his mission in 1840-2. Again in 1872 an
apostolic delegation consisting of the late President George A. Smith
(cousin of the Prophet) and the late President Lorenzo Snow were sent
to Palestine. The purpose of their mission in part is thus stated in
President Young's letter of appointment to George A. Smith.

    When you get to the land of Palestine we wish you to dedicate
    and consecrate that land to the Lord that it may be blessed with
    fruitfulness preparatory to the return of the Jews in fulfillment
    of prophecy and the accomplishment of the purposes of our heavenly
    Father. [19]

Acting, then, under the divine authority restored to earth by the
Prophet Moses, this Apostolic delegation--as well as the Apostle first
sent--from the summit of Mount Olivet blessed the land, and dedicated
it for the return of the Jews. It is not strange, therefore, to those
who look upon such a movement as Zionism with faith in God's great
latter-day work to see the spirit now moving upon the minds of the Jews
prompting their return to the land of their fathers. To them it is but
the operation of the Spirit of God in their souls, turning their hearts
to the promises made to the fathers.

Meantime, and quite apart from the Zionite movement, changes are taking
place in the promised land that augur well for the fulfillment of this
Book of Mormon prophecy. For instance, the British Consul reports
for 1876 give the number of Jews in Judea at from fifteen to twenty
thousand. Twenty years later, viz. in 1896, the same authority gives
the number of Jews at from sixty to seventy thousand; and what was more
promising for the future both for the people and the country inhabited,
this new Jewish population was turning its attention to the cultivation
of the soil, which but requires the blessings of God unto it to restore
it to its ancient fruitfulness, and which will make it possible for it
to sustain once more a numerous population. [20]

Thus in the preparations evidently being made for the return of the
Jews to the land of their forefathers, and their beginning to believe
in Jesus, this remarkable Book of Mormon prophecy is in the way of


_The Work of the Lord to Commence Among all Nations to Bring About
the Restoration of His People Israel, and a Universal Reign of Peace
and Righteousness_.

    And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall commence his work
    among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, to bring about
    the restoration of his people upon the earth.

The 19th century of the Christian era, especially the last three
quarters of it, will be regarded as a most wonderful period of human
progress. [21] An age of inventions and discoveries in all departments
of human knowledge and human activities. During that time, through
human invention, machinery was so multiplied and made to serve the
industrial requirements of man that we may say that the race was
emancipated from the drudgery under which it had sweltered for ages. In
field and factory machinery was made to perform the labor which in ages
hitherto had been done by human hands. Husbandry, by reason of so much
machinery being applied to agricultural pursuits, became a gentlemanly
occupation as compared with the farm drudgery of former years. The
increased product in all lines of manufactures multiplied comforts and
placed them within the reach of all, so that the standard of living
among the common people was immensely improved.

This period also witnessed great advancement in the matter of
transportation. On land it developed from the ox team and horse
carriage to the automobile and lightning express train, capable of
covering from fifty to seventy and now ninety miles per hour. It saw
Europe and America converted into a net work of railroads, binding all
parts of the respective continents together with easy, safe, and swift
means of traffic, and carried to the markets of every city the various
products of all the countries of the globe.

Water transportation within the same period developed from the slow
sailing vessel, dependent on the winds and ocean currents to the modern
"ocean greyhound" capable of making its way against both ocean current
and winds at a speed never realized by the sailing vessel with both
wind and ocean currents in its favor. The stormy Atlantic, to cross
which in the early years of the century was a tedious and dangerous
journey of many weeks, by the close of the 19th century was a matter
of five days pleasure trip. All mystery and dread of "old ocean" had
disappeared, and men no longer mourned the fate of "those who go
down to the sea in ships," since ocean travel is far less dangerous
than overland travel, and the oceans so far from being regarded any
longer with the old time awe and mystery are now looked upon as merely
convenient highways for the commerce of the world. By the speed of
ocean travel we may say that all the continents and islands of the
globe are married.

Running parallel with this development of transportation on land and
sea, is what may be called the growth of our instantaneous means of
communication. At the opening of the period we are considering the pony
express and mail coach were our most rapid means of communication,
and looking back to those days such means of communication seem
marvellously inadequate to civilized life. At the close of the century,
however, by means of ocean cables and telegraph lines, and telephone
instrumentalities--to say nothing of the more wonderful wireless
telegraphy now coming into use--we are in instant communication with
all the great centers of civilization, and each morning may read the
world's daily history gathered by these agencies for our instruction.

In the same period, in the matter of illumination, we went from the
tallow dip and farthing rush light to gas and electricity. From the
slow working hand press to the lightning Hoe multicolor printing press,
capable of printing, in different colors, folding, pasting and counting
from twenty-four thousand to one hundred thousand impressions per hour!
Within our period improvements in telescopes have revealed new wonders
of the universe. Improvement in microscopes have revealed wonders
undreamed of in former times both in organic and inorganic nature.
In the laboratories of the world new mysteries of light and heat and
other elementary forces of nature were revealed. Substances which
aforetime had been regarded as opaque were found in some lights to be
transparent. Indeed in all the arts and sciences such progress was
made as had not before been made in a period of a thousand years. [22]
There seemed to have come an awakening of intellectual power in men,
and the whole world was transformed by means of it. Political liberties
were enlarged, old tyrannies were rendered for the present and future
impossible in many countries, because of the consciousness of inherent
power in the people.

Our period witnessed also the rise and progress of the peace movement.
A movement whose chief purpose is to substitute peaceful arbitration
as a method of settling international differences for the dreadful
arbitrament of war. The first peace society was formed in America
early in the century--1815--and while not attracting much attention at
first, the movement gradually increased in importance until at last it
arose from a merely national movement to an international one, as is
evidenced from the fact that at its great conference at the Hague in
1899 there were accredited representatives from the following nations:
United States, Great Britain, Russia, Germany, France, Austria-Hungary,
Belgium, China, Denmark, Holland, Italy, Japan, Sweden, Norway, Persia,
Portugal, Roumania, Servia, Siam, Switzerland, and Turkey. It was this
conference of 1899 that finally established the world's permanent court
of arbitration at the Hague, to which several important international
questions have already been referred and settled. And while the peace
movement and arbitration has not yet relieved the world from recurrence
of dreadful wars, still the establishment of the permanent court for
international arbitration is a mighty stride in the interest of the
world's peace. It gives more than hope. It establishes confidence that
the time will come when there will be a disarmament of the nations,
and the old prophet's dream figured forth in his vision of the nations
beating their spears into pruning hooks and their swords into plow
shares will be realized, and the nations shall learn war no more.

It cannot be that this wonderful transformation of the world within our
period has no significance. A new era has certainly dawned upon the
world. Old things are passing away. All things are becoming new. Surely
such changing conditions in material things prophesy corresponding
changes in men as individuals and in their community life. These
material improvements will doubtless be met by corresponding
improvements in moral and spiritual wellbeing. There is undoubtedly
a close connection between this influx of intellectual light and
the splendid opening of the great new dispensation of the gospel of
Jesus Christ. When the Lord renewed divine communication to man in
the visions and revelations granted to Joseph Smith, there seemed
to have accompanied this influx of spiritual light the intellectual
light of which I have been speaking, and which has accomplished such
transformations in the affairs of men and nations as are here noted. To
the spirit which is in man the Spirit of the Lord has given inspiration
to some purpose. It is not difficult to believe--nay to conceive the
contrary seems impossible--that the Lord, according to the Book of
Mormon prophecy, has commenced to bring about the restoration of his
people Israel upon the earth, and to usher into the world that blessed
reign of truth, peace and righteousness so long hoped for; so long the
theme of poets, sages, statesmen and prophets; when with righteousness
the Lord shall judge the pure and reprove with equity for the meek of
the earth; when the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard
shall lie down with the kid, and the calf and the young lion, and the
fatling together, and a little child shall lead them; when the cow and
the bear shall feed, and their young ones shall lie down together; when
the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and the suckling child shall
play on the hole of the cockatrice's den; when they shall not hurt nor
destroy in all God's holy mountain; when the earth shall be full of
the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea; when man shall
know how sweet and pleasant it is for men to dwell together in unity
and peace; and when, to correspond with these moral and spiritual
conditions of the world, the material forces and resources of the earth
shall be developed; distance annihilated; all the ends of the earth
brought together in instant communication; poverty and crime banished;
when labor shall have its own and the idler shall not sit in the lap
of luxury, a burden to labor, but all shall contribute by intelligent
industry to an enlightened world's necessities. The realization of the
dream has long been deferred, but we are taught by scripture that if
the vision tarry, wait for it, for it will come. Surely we may wait in
confidence when in such a marked manner as here indicated the hand of
God is to be seen fashioning and directing those events which shall
culminate in the perfect realization of all the good that has been
decreed for the earth and the inhabitants thereof.


_The Sign of the Modern World's Awakening_.

An interesting feature in the awakening of the world, considered in the
last subdivision of this chapter, is the fact that not only did this
awakening begin about the time the Book of Mormon was published to the
world, but it is one of the prophecies of the book that it should be
so. That is to say, the spiritual and intellectual awakening of the
modern world, and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon were to be
contemporaneous events.

In the course of his ministry among the Nephites, the Messiah directed
especial attention to, and laid great stress upon one of the prophecies
of Isaiah, which follows:

    Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice; with the voice together shall
    they sing, for they shall see eye to eye, when the Lord shall bring
    again Zion. Break forth into joy, sing together, ye waste places of
    Jerusalem, for the Lord hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed
    Jerusalem. The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all
    the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation
    of God.

Later in Messiah's ministry, when referring again to this prophecy, he

    When they [the foregoing words of Isaiah] shall be fulfilled,
    then is the fulfilling of the covenant which the Father hath made
    unto his people, O house of Israel. And then shall the remnants
    which shall be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth, be
    gathered in from the east, and from the west, and from the south,
    and from the north; and they shall be brought to the knowledge of
    the Lord their God, who hath redeemed them. * * * And behold, this
    people will I establish in this land, unto the fulfilling of the
    covenant which I made with your father Jacob; and it shall be a New
    Jerusalem. And the powers of heaven shall be in the midst of this
    people; yea, even I will be in the midst of you. Behold, I am he of
    whom Moses spake, saying, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise
    up unto you of your brethren, like unto me, him shall ye hear in
    all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to
    pass that every soul who will not hear that prophet shall be cut
    off from among the people. * * * And I will remember the covenant
    which I have made with my people, and I have covenanted with them
    that I would gather them together in mine own due time, that I
    would give unto them again the land of their fathers, for their
    inheritance, which is the land of Jerusalem, which is the promised
    land unto them forever, saith the Father. And it shall come to
    pass that the time cometh when the fulness of my gospel shall be
    preached unto them. And they shall believe in me, that I am Jesus
    Christ, the Son of God, and shall pray unto the Father in my name.
    Then [referring to Isaiah] shall their watchmen lift up their
    voice, and with the voice together shall they sing; for they shall
    see eye to eye. [23]

And now as to the sign which he gave by which the branch of the
house of Israel in the American continents might know that this work
of restoring the house of Israel to the land of their inheritance,
together with the spiritual and intellectual awakening that should
attend upon that event--of this Jesus said:

    And, verily, I say unto you, I give unto you a sign, that ye may
    know the time when these things shall be about to take place, that
    I shall gather in from their long dispersion my people, O house of
    Israel, and shall establish again among them my Zion. And behold,
    this is the thing which I will give unto you for a sign, for verily
    I say unto you, that when these things which I declare unto you,
    and which I shall declare unto you hereafter of myself, and by
    the power of the Holy Ghost, which shall be given unto you of the
    Father--[when these things] shall be made known unto the Gentiles,
    that they may know concerning this people who are a remnant of
    the house of Jacob, and concerning this my people who shall be
    scattered by them.--Verily, verily, I say unto you, when these
    things shall be made known unto them of the Father, and shall come
    forth of the Father, from them unto you--* * when these works,
    and the works which shall be wrought among you hereafter, shall
    come forth from the Gentiles, unto your seed [through publishing
    the Book of Mormon] * * * it shall be a sign unto them that they
    may know that the work of the Father hath already commenced unto
    the fulfilling of the covenant which he [God] hath made unto the
    people who are of the house of Israel. * * * And then shall the
    work of the Father commence at that day, even when this gospel
    shall be preached among the remnant of this people--verily I say
    unto you, at that day shall the work of the Father commence among
    all the dispersed of my people; yea, even the tribes which have
    been lost, which the Father hath led away out of Jerusalem. Yea,
    the work shall commence among all the dispersed of my people *
    * * to prepare the way whereby they may come unto me, that they
    may call on the Father in my name; yea, and then shall the work
    commence, with the Father, among all nations, in preparing the
    way whereby his people may be gathered home to the land of their
    inheritance. [24]

That is to say, the coming forth of the Book of Mormon was to be
the signal for this modern world awakening; and the "sign" of the
commencement of the work of the Lord among all nations, kindreds,
tongues, and people, to bring to pass the restoration of his people and
the accomplishment of his purposes in all the earth. The facts already
set forth establish the fulfillment of this no less venturesome--i. e.
venturesome for an imposter to make--than remarkable prophecy.


_Conditional Prophecies--The Evidence of Things Worthy of God to

In closing these chapters on the prophecies of the Book of Mormon, I
direct attention to what I shall call conditional prophecies. Not for
the purpose of referring to their fulfillment, either accomplished or
prospective, as evidence of the truth of the book, but as exhibiting
the fact that the Book of Mormon has a prophetic message for the
present generation worthy of God to reveal, and one that it concerns
the Gentile races now occupying the continents of America to know.
These prophecies deal with the terms upon which the Gentile races
may maintain for themselves and perpetuate to their posterity the
inheritance they have secured in the goodly land of Joseph--the
American continents. First let it be remembered that these continents,
according to the Book of Mormon, are a promised land, especially to the
seed of Joseph, son of the Patriarch Jacob, and also to the Gentiles
whom God shall lead hither. To the leader of the Nephite colony the
Lord said:

    And in as much as ye shall keep my commandments ye shall prosper,
    and shall be led to the land of promise. Yea, even a land which I
    have prepared for you; yea, a land which is choice above all other

Subsequently, as is well known, the Nephite colony arrived in America,
repeatedly referred to by them and their descendants as "the land of

Before his demise the prophet Lehi, who lived to arrive with his colony
upon the promised land, made the following prophecy concerning the
occupancy of the land by his people:

    Notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of
    promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which
    the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the
    inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land
    unto me, and to my children forever; and also all those who should
    be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord. Wherefore,
    I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which
    is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they
    shall be brought by the hand of the Lord. Wherefore, this land is
    consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that
    they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath
    given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they
    shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be
    because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound, cursed shall
    be the land for their sakes; but unto the righteous it shall be
    blessed forever. And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be
    kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many
    nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for
    an inheritance. Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that
    inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of
    Jerusalem shall keep his commandments they shall prosper upon the
    face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations,
    that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be
    that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon
    the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor
    to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell
    safely forever. But, behold, when the time cometh that they shall
    dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings
    from the hand of the Lord; having a knowledge of the creation of
    the earth, and all men, knowing the great and marvelous works of
    the Lord from the creation of the world; having power given them
    to do all things by faith; having all the commandments from the
    beginning, and having been brought by his infinite goodnesss into
    this precious land of promise; behold, I say, if the day shall come
    that they will reject the Holy One of Israel, the true Messiah,
    their Redeemer and their God, behold the judgment of him that is
    just shall rest upon them; yea, he will bring other nations unto
    them, and he will give unto them [the incoming nations] power, and
    he will take away from them [the remnants of the Nephites] the
    lands of their possessions; and he will cause them to be scattered
    and smitten. Yea, as one generation passeth to another, there shall
    be bloodshed, and great visitations among them. [25]

This prophecy was fulfilled in the experiences of Lehi's descendants.
Though in the course of their history they had some long periods, and
some intermittent seasons of righteousness, they eventually, even after
the personal ministrations of the Son of God among them, departed from
righteousness, rejected Jesus Christ, and the decreed judgment fell
upon them to the uttermost. The Gentile races finally came to the land,
and took possession of it, while the descendants of the once favored
race that occupied it were dispossessed and broken, and scattered.

The promises made to the Nephites had also been given to the Jaredites
who preceded them in possession of the land. To the brother of Jared,
the leader of the Jaredite colony, the Lord said: "I will go before thee
into a land which is choice above all the lands of the earth." [26]

Moroni, while abridging the records of the Jaredites, which give an
account of that people's migration to America, refers to the decrees of
God concerning the land in the following passage:

    And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the
    sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth
    even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other
    lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people; and
    he had sworn in his wrath unto the brother of Jared, that whoso
    should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and
    forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should
    be swept off when the fulness of his wrath should come upon them.
    And now we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land,
    that it is a land of promise, and whatsoever nation shall possess
    it, shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness
    of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath
    cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity; for, behold,
    this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore
    he that doth possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept
    off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until
    the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they
    are swept off. And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye
    may know the decrees of God, that ye may repent, and not continue
    in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring
    down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you, as the inhabitants
    of the land hath hitherto done. Behold, this is a choice land, and
    whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and
    from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they
    will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath
    been manifested by the things which we have written.

Jesus also in the course of his ministry among the Nephites refers to
these same decrees concerning the land; or, better say, makes them,
since he is the "God of the land." His words follow:

    The Father hath commanded me that I should give unto you [the
    Nephites] this land, for your inheritance. And I say unto you that
    if the Gentiles do not repent, after the blessing which they shall
    receive after they have scattered my people, then shall ye who are
    a remnant of the house of Jacob go forth among them; and ye shall
    be in the midst of them, who shall be many; and ye shall be among
    them, as a lion among the beasts of the forest, and as a young lion
    among the flocks of sheep, who, if he goeth through, both treadeth
    down and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver. Thy hand shall be
    lifted up upon thine adversaries, and all thine enemies shall be
    cut off. And I will gather my people together, as a man gathereth
    his sheaves into the floor, for I will make my people with whom the
    Father hath covenanted, yea, I will make thy horn iron, and I will
    make thy hoofs brass. And thou shalt beat in pieces many people;
    and I will consecrate their gain unto the Lord, and their substance
    unto the Lord of the whole earth. And behold, I am he who doeth it.
    And it shall come to pass, saith the Father, that the sword of my
    justice shall hang over them at that day; and except they repent,
    it shall fall upon them, saith the Father, yea, even upon all the
    nations of the Gentiles. [27]

Then follows an explanation of how, through the seed of Abraham, all
the kindreds of the earth are blessed:

    Unto the pouring out of the Holy Ghost through me [Jesus Christ]
    upon the Gentiles, which blessing upon the Gentiles shall make
    them mighty above all, unto the scattering of my people, O house
    of Israel; and they shall be a scourge unto the people of this
    land. Nevertheless, when they shall have received the fulness of my
    gospel, then if they shall harden their hearts against me, I will
    return their iniquities upon their own heads, saith the Father. [28]

Speaking further of the "great and marvelous work" which the Lord
should bring forth in the last days, he again refers to the Gentiles
upon the promised land, in the following words:

    Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in
    my words, who am Jesus Christ, whom the Father shall cause him to
    bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that
    he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done
    even as Moses said), they shall be cut off from among my people
    who are of the covenant. And my people who are a remnant of Jacob
    shall be among the Gentiles, yea, in the midst of them as a lion
    among the beasts of the forest, as the young lion among the flock
    of sheep, who, if he go through both treadeth down and teareth to
    pieces, and none can deliver. Their hand shall be lifted up upon
    their adversaries, and all their enemies shall be cut off. Yea, wo
    be unto the Gentiles, except they repent, for it shall come to pass
    in that day, saith the Father, that I will cut off thy horses out
    of the midst of thee, and I will destroy thy chariots, and I will
    cut off the cities of thy land, and throw down all thy strongholds;
    and I will cut off witchcrafts out of thy hand, and thou shalt
    have no more soothsayers; thy graven images I will also cut off,
    and thy standing images out of the midst of thee, and thou shalt
    no more worship the works of thy hands; and I will pluck up thy
    groves out of the midst of thee; so will I destroy thy cities. And
    it shall come to pass that all lying, and deceiving, and envying,
    and strifes, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, shall be done away.
    For it shall come to pass, saith the Father, that at that day
    whosoever will not repent and come unto my beloved Son, them will
    I cut off from among my people. O house of Israel; and I will
    execute vengeance and fury upon them, even as upon the heathen,
    such as they have not heard. But if they [the Gentiles] will
    repent, and hearken unto my words, and harden not their hearts, I
    will establish my church among them and they shall come in unto the
    covenant, and be numbered among this remnant of Jacob, unto whom I
    have given this land for their inheritance. And they shall assist
    my people, the remnant of Jacob, and also, as many of the house of
    Israel as shall come, that they may build a city, which shall be
    called the New Jerusalem; and then shall they assist my people that
    they may be gathered in, who are scattered upon all the face of the
    land, in unto the New Jerusalem. And then shall the power of heaven
    come down among them; and I also will be in the midst. [29]

Here then is the conditional prophecy that it concerns the proud
Gentile races now inhabiting the American continents to know. These
continents are a promised land; they are given primarily to the
descendants of the Patriarch Joseph as an inheritance, but the Gentile
races are also given an inheritance in them with the descendants
of Joseph. The whole land, however, is dedicated to righteousness
and liberty, and the people who possess it, whether of the house of
Israel or Gentiles, must be a righteous people, and worship the "God
of the land, who is Jesus Christ." In that event God stands pledged
to preserve the land and the people thereof from all other nations,
and to bless them with very great and peculiar blessings guaranteeing
to them freedom and peaceful possession of the land forever. If the
Gentile races shall observe these conditions they and their children
are to share in the blessings of the land in connection with the
descendants of the Patriarch Joseph. If they depart from justice,
reject righteousness and Jesus Christ, then the judgments decreed will
overtake them until they are wasted away. This is the decree of God
respecting the Western hemisphere, and is one of the important messages
that the Book of Mormon has to deliver to the present generation.

Nor is it the Book of Mormon alone that bears this message. So far as
the people of the United States are concerned, I might say, if not
one of their own prophets, at least their greatest statesman, gave
substantially the same warning to the people of that nation, and I
believe his utterances are equally applicable to the people occupying
the other parts of the American continents. Read the following
quotation from the speech delivered a few months before its author's
death, and tell me if the American statesman, Daniel Webster, did not
catch the same glow of inspiration when predicting the terms upon which
the people now occupying our country may hold their heritage, as that
which warmed the hearts of the Book of Mormon writers and speakers,
whose words are quoted in the preceding passages. Mr. Webster's speech
was delivered before the "New York Historical Society," on February
22nd--Washington's birthday--1852; as the great American died in
October following, the address was one of his last speeches.

    Unborn ages and visions of glory crowd upon my soul, the
    realization of all which, however, is in the hands and good
    pleasure of Almighty God; but, under his divine blessing, it will
    be dependent on the character and the virtues of ourselves, and of
    our posterity. If classical history has been found to be, is now,
    and shall continue to be, the concomitant of free institutions, and
    of popular eloquence, what a field is opening to us for another
    Herodotus, another Thucydides, and another Livy!

    And let me say, gentlemen, that if we and our posterity shall be
    true to the Christian religion--if we and they shall live always
    in the fear of God, and shall respect his commandments, if we and
    they shall maintain just, moral sentiments, and such conscientious
    convictions of duty as shall control the heart and life--we may
    have the highest hopes of the future fortunes of our country;
    and if we maintain those institutions of government and that
    political union, exceeding all praise as much as it exceeds all
    former examples of political associations, we may be sure of one
    thing--that, while our country furnishing materials for a thousand
    masters of the historic art, it will afford no topic for a Gibbon.
    It will have no Decline and Fall. It will go on prospering and to

    But, if we and our posterity reject religious instruction and
    authority, violate the rules of eternal justice, trifle with the
    injunctions of morality, and recklessly destroy the political
    constitution which holds us together, no man can tell how sudden
    a catastrophe may overwhelm us, that shall bury all our glory in
    profound obscurity. Should that catastrophe happen, let it have no
    history! Let the horrible narrative never be written! Let its fate
    be like that of the lost books of Livy, which no human eye shall
    ever read; or the missing Pleiad, of which no man can ever know
    more, than that it is lost, and lost forever!

I think my statement will be within reasonable limits when I say that
this sublime doctrine and warning of Mr. Webster's has the same source
of inspiration as the utterances of the Book of Mormon writers. I
believe that all who read and compare these passages will conclude
there is something more than mere coincidence in their agreement.

As before stated, it is not my purpose in calling attention to
these conditional prophecies to point to their fulfillment, either
accomplished or prospective, in evidence of the truth of the Book of
Mormon. Their worth as evidence to the truth of the book rests solely
upon the importance of the matter with which they deal. The demand
of the world is, and it is a reasonable one, that a book purporting
to be a revelation from God should deal with subjects that it is
important for men to know, and I regard the terms that constitute
the conditions upon which the American continents may be securely
held by the people who possess them, as a matter of the highest
importance for the people to know, and hence worthy to be found in a
book purporting to be a revelation from God. Such knowledge is no less
important than to know the source whence the continents of America are
peopled; the providences of God in dealing with them; and the fact
that the Son of God visited the western hemisphere, and taught to the
inhabitants thereof the gospel, and established here his church for the
perpetuation of the truth and for the salvation of men. All this is
revealed in the Book of Mormon, and makes up a mass of knowledge that
it concerns mankind to know, and hence is worthy of God to reveal. Had
the Book of Mormon dealt with light or trivial things--things unworthy
of God to reveal, mankind would require no further evidence that its
claims to a divine origin were baseless; and conversely: if the book
reveals a mass of knowledge--worthy of God to reveal and important for
man to know--then it is evidence of considerable weight that the book
is of God.


1. II. Nephi xxx: 3-11.

2. II. Nephi xxx: 12-15.

3. "Descendants of the Jews." This expression, I believe, is used in
this instance as equivalent to "Descendants of the house of Israel."
That is, the American Indians will know they are Israelites. This sense
of the phrase "the Jews" is used in other parts of the Book of Mormon:
for instance, "That the father may bring about * * * his great and
eternal purposes, in restoring the Jews, or all the House of Israel,
to the land of their inheritance." We have already pointed out in
previous foot notes that according to the Book of Mormon the American
Indians are a mixture of the tribes of Manasseh, Ephraim and Judah (see
pp. 95, 325-6); and therefore we think the phrase "descendants of the
Jews," does not mean to confine native American race descent to the
Jews alone, but merely to say that they are descendants of the House of
Israel, for which "Jews" here stands as equivalent.

4. See Doc. & Cov. Section xxix and Section xxxii.

5. History of the Church, Vol. I, p. 185, note. Aut. P. P. Pratt, pp.

6. It may be suspected that Elder Pratt colored his account of this
speech to fit the prophecy of the Book of Mormon, but if that were so
some reference to its fulfillment of the prediction--"then shall they
rejoice"--would naturally be looked for; but it is a singular thing
that nowhere in the early literature of the Church is reference made to
this prophetic page. The full account of this first Indian mission will
be found in the "History of the Church," Vol. I, pp. 111-120, and pages

7. "History of the Church," Vol. I, pp. 184-5.

8. "History of the Church," Vol. V., Chapters xxiv and xxv. The prophet
had been visiting relatives in Dixon, and while there fell into the
hands of his enemies, who sought to take him to Missouri. He escaped
them, however, by a writ of habeas corpus, on which he was tried and
acquitted at Nauvoo.

9. "Millennial Star," Vol. XXI, pp. 634-5.

10. Amos ix: 14.

11. Obadiah i: 17.

12. Deut. vii: 6.

13. Zechariah ii: 12.

14. Isaiah xiv: 1.

15. Ezekiel xxxvii: 21-27.

16. Isaiah xix: 21.

17. "In the opinion of some, it may become a training-ground for those
who are eventually to go to Zion. * * * Whatever solution the East
African scheme may find, it can be but a temporary one. The eye of the
people's soul cannot be turned from the object upon which it has rested
for centuries and centuries. * * * The soul of Israel has always felt,
and when occasion offered has always said, that such a concentration at
such a rallying-point, can be induced only in the ancient home of the
children of Israel, in Palestine."--Richard J. H. Gottheil.

18. See Doc. & Cov., Sec. 110.

19. "Biography of Lorenzo Snow," p. 496.

20. Since the foregoing was written the following press dispatch from
Jerusalem, under date of July 28th, 1906, appeared in the daily papers
of the United States: Jerusalem, July 28--The Zionist movement--the
return of the Jews to Palestine--is being carried actively on, and
during the last few months there has been a remarkable influx of
Israelites into the Holy Land.

A fertile region, east of the Jordan, toward Kerak, has been inspected
by a party of Jewish financiers, with the idea of colonizing it. * *
* * * * The intending colonists are negotiating with the government
for the purchase of land and for guarantees of protection against the
Bedouins. Five thousand Jewish emigrants from Russia and the Balkan
States recently landed at Jaffa. They will be distributed among the
various Jewish colonies, which are to be found in all the fertile
districts of Palestine. It looks as if the Chosen People are literally
coming to their own again.

21. "A mighty dawn of ideas is peculiar to our own age (nineteenth
century)."--Victor Hugo.

22. "No previous century ever saw anything approaching to the increase
in social complexity which has been wrought in America and Europe
since 1789. In science and in the industrial arts the change has been
greater than in the ten preceding centuries taken together. Contrast
the seventeen centuries which it took to remodel the astronomy of
Hipparchus with the forty years which it has taken to remodel the
chemistry of Berzelius and the biology of Cuvier. * * * How small
the difference between the clumsy wagons of the Tudor period and the
mailcoach in which our grandfathers rode, compared to the difference
between the mail-coach and the railway train! How rapid the changes
in philosophic thinking since the time of the Encyclopedistes, in
comparison with the slow though important changes which occurred
between the epoch of Aristotle and the epoch of Descartes! In morality,
both individual and national, and in general humanity of disposition
and refinement of manners, the increased rapidity of change has been no
less marked."--Cosmic Philosophy (Fiske), Vol. IV., p. 54, 55.

23. III. Nephi 20.

24. III. Nephi, chapter 21.

25. II. Nephi i: 5-12.

26. Ether i: 42.

27. III. Nephi 20: 14-20.

28. III. Nephi 20: 27, 28.

29. III. Nephi xxi: 11-25.



"I can no more remember the books I have read than the meals I have
eaten," said Emerson, "but they have made me." In this way the American
philosopher recognizes the simple truth that the reading of books
has something to do with the making of a man--that they affect the
mind. A book has a spirit as distinctly as a painting or of a piece
of sculpture has "feeling"--of course I mean a real work of art into
which something from the soul of the artist has passed. The best
thing about a painting or piece of sculpture is said to be that which
cannot be described; so also the best part of a book is the spirit of
it, which may not always be describable. And that elusive, mysterious
quality we call its spirit may arise from something quite apart from
its rhetoric, or logic or diction. It may be even as the voice of God:
not in the strong wind, that rends the mountains and breaks in pieces
the rocks before the Lord; not in the earthquake nor in the fire; but
in the still, small voice which follows the wind and earthquake and
fire. [1] So with a book: its spirit may owe its existence to its simple
truth--to the spirit of truth in them that made it.

"Do you ever think," said a writer in one of our popular magazines--"Do
you ever think what is the effect of a book on your mind? * * * * Is
your mind purer for it, or clearer? Has it filled your mind with good
or bad images? Has it raised your standard or lowered it? * * * * *
Every book you read and understand affects you for better or worse. It
has some effect upon you, and if you are sane you are bound to find out
what that is."

In common with all books the Book of Mormon has its spirit, produces
its effects upon the minds of men; and as it claims to be a work
originally written and also translated through the inspiration of God,
and deals primarily with sacred things, it is to be expected that
the spirit of this book will have not only a good, but even a divine
influence; that it will be of a faith-promoting, doubt-dispersing,
comfort-bringing character. Its effects upon the minds of men,
therefore, may be another test of its claims to a divine origin; and to
that test I now submit it.

In his work entitled "My First Mission," the late President George
Q. Cannon makes the following statement respecting the influence
exerted over his spirit by reading the Book of Mormon under the trying
conditions in which he was placed while serving as a missionary in the
Hawaiian Islands:

    Some of my readers may be placed in circumstances similar to those
    which surrounded me a part of the time on the Sandwich Islands, and
    it may be profitable to tell them how I kept from losing courage
    and becoming home-sick. My love for home is naturally very strong.
    For the first year after I left home I could scarcely think about
    it without my feelings getting the better of me. But here I was
    in a distant land, among a people whose language and habits were
    strange to me. Their very food was foreign to me, and unlike
    anything I had ever before seen or tasted. I was much of the time
    separated from my companions, the Elders. Until I mastered the
    language and commenced preaching and baptizing the people, I was
    indeed a stranger among them.

    Before I commenced holding regular meetings I had plenty of time
    for meditation and to review all the events of my short life, and
    to think of the beloved home from which I was so far separated. It
    was then I found the value of the Book of Mormon. It was a book
    which I always loved. If I felt inclined to be lonely, to be low
    spirited, or home-sick, I had only to turn to its sacred pages to
    receive consolation, new strength and a rich outpouring of the
    Spirit. Scarcely a page that did not contain encouragement for
    such as I was. The salvation of man was the great theme upon which
    its writers dwelt and for this they were willing to undergo every
    privation and make every sacrifice.

    What were my petty difficulties compared with those afflictions
    which they had to endure? If I expected to share the glory for
    which they contended, I could see that I must labor in the same
    Spirit. If the sons of King Mosiah could relinquish their high
    estate, and go forth among the degraded Lamanites to labor as they
    did, should not I labor with patience and devoted zeal for the
    salvation of these poor red men, heirs of the same promise?

    Let me recommend this book, therefore, to young and old, if they
    need comfort and encouragement. Especially can I recommend it to
    those who are away from home on missions. No man can read it,
    partake of its spirit and obey its teachings, without being filled
    with a deep love for the souls of men and a burning zeal to do all
    in his power to save them.

In the experience and sentiments expressed in the foregoing passage,
Elder Cannon but voices the experience and sentiments of very many
Latter-day Saints, including thousands of missionaries who have felt
all that he has described with reference to the effects of the Book of
Mormon upon his spirit. The experiences of this host of believers may
be properly appealed to as evidence for the effect of the book upon
their minds; and I cannot believe but that it is also an evidence of
its truth. Men have gone to the Book of Mormon in despondency, and
have come away cheered; they have gone to it in sorrow, and have come
away comforted; they have gone to it at times when overwhelmed for the
moment by the mists which the speculations of men sometimes throw over
truth, and have come away from it enlightened--with faith and hope
and charity renewed. It created for them a firmer faith in God. In
the presence of its spirit doubt took wings. Its moral and spiritual
standards they find to be the highest and noblest. Indeed so perfect is
its morality that no one has yet been able to bring a complaint against
it on the ground of moral defect; and it was doubtless a consciousness
of its moral excellence that led the Prophet Joseph Smith himself to
declare on one occasion, when in council with the Twelve Apostles,
that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and
that a man could get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than by
following any other book whatsoever. [2] If in its historical parts
believers find it dealing with events that exhibit selfishness, unholy
ambitions, and all the follies and crimes common to all times and all
nations and races of men, they never find its treatment of such things
of the kind that blazons evil deeds, or consecrates crime, much less
of the kind that cannonizes the vicious. In its pages they see things
in their true light. There is no shuffling, but evil deeds receive
their proper condemnation in the simple, straightforward language of
its inspired men. For believers the Book of Mormon differs from the
books of men, as the works of nature differ from the works of men. And
with what relief men of deep spiritual natures turn from the works of
men to the works of nature! From artistic parks, to nature's jumbled
wilderness; from well kept gardens, to even desert plains or wild
valleys; from grass-lined, men-made lakelets to some huge waterbody,
mountain rimmed, of unknown depths and wonderous coloring; from crowded
cities with their din and strife to mountain tops, or lonely ocean's
shore, where the freed soul in solitude can hold communion with his
God--where deep may call to deep, and inspiration gather for life's

All this and more believers find in the pages of the Book of Mormon,
and the book that breathes such a spirit must surely have somewhat of
divinity in it; and the existence of the divine spirit in the book must
be somewhat of evidence that its claims are honest, and its contents
true. This, or else we must believe that men gather grapes of thorns,
and figs of thistles; that impure fountains send forth pure streams!

I shall be told, however, that the class of witnesses here appealed
to, viz., those believers in the Book of Mormon who receive from its
pages this spiritual comfort, are for the most part simple folk, who
bring little or nothing in the way of scholarship to the examination
of the book; and few of them ever stop to consider it in a thoroughly
analytical manner at all. I shall not deny the charge, in truth,
I rather rejoice in the fact; and I think I am justified in such
rejoicing since I must needs think it takes on some of the coloring of
that joy which Jesus expressed when he said, on the occasion of some
of his simple minded disciples exulting in the possession of certain
spiritual graces--"I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast
revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in
thy sight." [3] The fact that this spiritual grace and comfort from the
volume of American scripture is enjoyed chiefly by people of humble
spirit, is an evidence to me that a certain truth expressed by ancient
apostles is universal in its nature--good in all ages and among all
people, viz. "God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the
humble." [4]

When men speak of pride, their hearers have in mind, chiefly, the
"purse-proud"--the pride of the rich made haughty by the power which
wealth gives; or else they think of "birth-pride"--the distinction that
comes from the accident of birth; or of "political-pride," that comes
from civic position; or perhaps the "pride of the brave and strong,"
gratified by recognition in high martial stations. But there is another
pride more offensive to God perhaps, than pride in any one of the
forms mentioned. I mean "intellectual pride," the pride of knowledge,
of opinion, the pride which so often attends upon the worldly learned
man who has not as yet progressed so far in learning as to bring to
the mind that humility of spirit which rightly belongs to, and will
at last be found with, profound learning. For my own part I can think
of nothing that could be a greater offense against the majesty of God
than for a man with his limited intellectual power presuming to pass
judgment upon and reject the things of God, because, forsooth, these
things do not conform to his opinion of what the things of God should
be like; or because the way in which they are revealed does not conform
to the manner in which he thinks God should impart his truths. Such
pride always has and always will separate men from receiving knowledge
by divine communication. While the meek and humble of spirit, borne
down with the sense of their own limitations, find grace and spiritual
enlightenment and comfort in the things which God reveals; and often
arrive at hidden treasures of knowledge, and even of wisdom, unknown to
the intellectually proud whom God resisteth.

In this connection, too, it should be remembered the class of people
for whom the Book of Mormon was especially prepared. While a revelation
to all the world, and containing profound truths the depths of which
man by human wisdom has not yet sounded, it is primarily designed
for the benighted, native American races, fallen from the high
station their forefathers once held in God's favor; and its simple
plainness and faith-promoting power will yet constitute it a mighty
instrumentality in bringing those races to a knowledge of God, and a
true understanding of their relationship to him. Hence I say, it is
pre-eminently fitting that this book should be of such character as to
appeal to the understanding of the simple, and those who are willing
and happy to be taught of God. And then, in any event, religion is
and ought to be a simple business, since among even highly civilized
nations there are many unlearned people who can understand only that
which is simple, and religion concerns alike the ignorant and the
learned, the poor and the rich. But plain to the point of being simple
as the Book of Mormon is, when men are made aware of its power to
rest the mind, to cheer the heart, to uplift the soul, they go to its
pages for help as the lame and blind and sick were wont to go to old
Bethsaida's pool, to whose waters an angel's touch had imparted healing

The spirit of the Book of Mormon, then, its beneficent influence upon
men's minds, are among the strongest evidences of its truth. This will
appear all the more if the reader will call to mind the fact that this
influence does not arise from the cleverness of its construction; for
its structure, as men view books, is complex, confusing and clumsy. Its
spirit and influence do not arise from its strictly logical treatment
of historical events, much less from its philosophical treatment of
them; compared in these particulars with the works of Hume, Macaulay,
Gibbon, Hallan or George Bancroft, it could be esteemed contemptible.
Nor do the beneficent effects of the book upon the minds of men arise
from its rhetoric, its beauty of diction, or the pleasing correctness
of its language; in all these particulars it is admitted to be faulty;
it has few or none of these merely human excellencies for which it may
be desired. Whatever power it possesses to cheer, comfort and encourage
men; whatever power to build up hope, create faith or promote charity,
exists not by virtue of its human excellencies, but in spite of their
absence; therefore such influence for good as it possesses must be
attributed to the Spirit of God in which it was written, and by which
it is permeated; and by reason of the presence of that spirit in it,
the book itself must be accorded a divine origin.

_The Poetry the Book of Mormon has Inspired_.

As might be expected, the Book of Mormon has inspired considerable
poetry among those who have accepted it as a revelation from God; and
as some idea of its influence upon minds of poetic temperament may be
revealed by these effusions, I present some of them.

I first quote Parley P. Pratt, one of the earliest poets of the New
Dispensation, and one of its most zealous Apostles. In his Key to
Theology, one of the most luminous works yet published by the Church,
when treating of the "Rise, Progress and Decline of the Science of
Theology in the Western Hemisphere"--he opens that chapter with the

  The spirit world is moved, the silence broken,
  The ancient Seers from out the ground have spoken.
  The appointed years on time's fleet wings have fled,
  And voices whisper from the ancient dead.
  Volumes of truth the sacred archives yield,
  The past, the glorious future, stand revealed.

It was the revelation of the Book of Mormon and the historical truths
which it reveals respecting the blessings of the Lord upon Israel that
inspired the following hymn:

  The morning breaks, the shadows flee;
      Lo! Zion's standard is unfurled!
  The dawning of a brighter day
      Majestic rises on the world.

  The clouds of error disappear
      Before the rays of truth divine;
  The glory, bursting from afar,
      Wide o'er the nations soon will shine.

  The Gentile fulness now comes in,
      And Israel's blessings are at hand;
  Lo! Judah's remnant, cleansed from sin,
      Shall in their promised Canaan stand.

  Jehovah speaks! let earth give ear,
      And Gentile nations turn and live;
  His mighty arm is making bare,
      His cov'nant people to receive.

  Angels from heaven and truth from earth
      Have met, and both have record borne;
  Thus Zion's light is bursting forth,
      To cheer her children's glad return.

The following hymn was also inspired by the Book of Mormon:

  An angel from on high,
    The long, long silence broke,
  Descending from the sky,
    These gracious words he spoke:
  Lo! in Cumorah's lonely hill,
  A sacred record lies concealed.

  Sealed by Moroni's hand,
    It has for ages lain,
  To wait the Lord's command,
    From dust to speak again.
  It shall again to light come forth,
  To usher in Christ's reign on earth.

  It speaks of Joseph's seed,
    And makes the remnant known
  Of nations long since dead,
    Who once had dwelt alone.
  The fulness of the gospel, too,
  Its pages will reveal to view.

  The time is now fulfilled,
    The long expected day;
  Let earth obedient yield.
    And darkness flee away;
  Open the seals, be wide unfurled
  Its light and glory to the world.

  Lo, Israel filled with joy,
    Shall now be gathered home,
  Their wealth and means employ
    To build Jerusalem;
  While Zion shall arise and shine,
  And fill the earth with truth divine.

Also the following on the destruction of the Nephites and the glory
that is yet to come to their posterity.

  O, who that has seen o'er the wide spreading plain,
    And read o'er the last scenes of woe?
  Four-and-twenty with Mormon were left to behold
    Their nation lie mould'ring below.

  The Nephites destroyed, the Lamanites dwelt
    For ages in sorrow unknown,
  Generations have passed till the Gentiles at last,
    Have divided their lands as their own.

  O, who that has seen o'er the wide spreading plain,
    The Lamanites wander forlorn,
  While the Gentiles in pride and oppression divide
    The land they could once call their own;

  And who that believes does not long for the hour
    When sin and oppression shall cease,
  And truth, like the rainbow, display through the shower,
    That bright written promise of peace?

  O, thou sore afflicted and sorrowful race,
    The days of thy sorrow shall end!
  The Lord has pronounced you a remnant of His,
    Descended from Abra'm His friend.

  Thy stones with fair colors most glorious shall stand.
    And sapphires all shining around,
  Thy windows of agates, in this glorious land,
    And thy gates with carbuncles abound.

  With songs of rejoicing to Zion return,
    And sorrow and sighing shall flee,
  The powers of heaven among you come down,
    And Christ in the centre will be.

  And then all the watchmen shall see eye to eye,
    When the Lord shall bring Zion again,
  The wolf and the kid down together shall lie,
    And the lion shall dwell with the lamb.

  The earth shall be filled with the knowledge of God,
    And nothing shall hurt nor destroy,
  And these are the tidings we have to proclaim,
    Glad tidings abounding with joy.

After Elder Pratt the most prolific of the early poets in the Church,
and one who perhaps caught most truly the genius of the work and
reduced it to poetic expression, was W. W. Phelps. He contributes the
following inspired by the Book of Mormon.

  O, stop and tell me, Red Man,
    Who are you, why you roam,
  And how you get your living;
    Have you no God, no home?

  With stature straight and portly,
    And decked in native pride,
  With feathers, paints and brooches,
    He willingly replied:

  "I once was pleasant Ephraim,
    When Jacob for me prayed,
  But O, how blessings vanish,
    When man from God has strayed!

  Before your nation knew us,
    Some thousand moons ago,
  Our fathers fell in darkness,
    And wandered to and fro.

  And long they've lived by hunting
    Instead of work and arts,
  And so our race has dwindled
    To idle Indian hearts.

  Yet hope within us lingers,
    As if the Spirit spoke,
  He'll come for your redemption,
    And break your Gentile yoke,

  And all your captive brothers,
    From every clime shall come,
  And quit their savage customs,
    To live with God at home.

  Then joy will fill our bosoms,
    And blessings crown our days,
  To live in pure religion,
    And sing our Maker's praise."

Of our later poets Elder Orson F. Whitney, of the Council of the
Twelve, has most celebrated the Nephite volume of scripture in his
great poem "Elias." One canto (VI) is wholly devoted to the Book of
Mormon under the caption "From Out the Dust." In this Canto Elder
Whitney treats the whole theme of America as a land of promise--

  The Old World, not the New,--this soil misnamed;
    Cradle of man and grave of nations vast,
  Whose glory, wealth, and wisdom had outfamed
    The mightiest of known empires, present, past;
  The land where Adam dwelt, where Eden cast
    Forth from her flaming gate the fateful pair
  Who fell that man might be; a fall still chaste,
    Albeit they sinned, descending death's dread stair
  To fling life's ladder down, Love's work and way prepare.

Of the decrees of God respecting the land, he writes.

  The God of freedom, God of justice, swore
    No tyrant should this chosen land defile;
  And nations here, that for a season bore
    The palm of power, must righteous be the while,
  Or ruin's avalanche ruin on ruin pile.
  * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

  Race upon race has perished in its pride,
    And nations lustrous as the lights of heaven
  Have sinned and sunk, in reckless suicide,
    Upon this soil, since that dread word was given.
  Realms battle-rent and regions tempest-riven;
    The wrath-swept land for ages desolate;
  A wretched remnant blasted, crust, and driven
    Forth by the furies of revengeful fate;
    Till wonder asks in vain, What of their former state?

  Wouldst know the cause, the upas-tree that bore
    The blight of desolation? 'Tis a theme
  To melt Earth's heart, and move all Heaven to pour
    With sorrow's heaving flood, as when supreme
  O'er fallen Lucifer, the generous stream
    Of grief half quenched the joy of victory.
  Mark how the annals of the ages teem
    With repetition? Time, eternity,
    The same have taught; but, few, alas! the moral see.

  There is a sin called self, which binds the world
    In fetters fell, than all save truth more strong;
  A sin most serpentine, round all men curled,
    And in its fatal fold earth writhes full long;
  Crime's great first cause, the primal root of wrong,
    Parent of pride and tree of tyranny.
  To lay the axe doth unto thee belong.
    Strike, that the world may know of liberty,
    And Zion's land indeed a land of Zion be!

The poet treats successively the Jaredite and Nephite occupancy of
the western world in the same noble strain of poetry. He closes the
Jaredite period with these verses, celebrating the last acts of the two
survivors of the Jaredite nation, Ether the Prophet, and Coriantumr the
last of the Jaredite kings.

  Usurping treason seized the civic helm,
  Wrong trampled right, and justice, judgment, fled.
  Then strife, division, hosts to battle led;
  The prophets, mocked, lift warning voice in vain;
  A blood-soaked continent, a sea, of dead,
  And of that mighty nation, fallen, self-slain.
  A prophet and a king, a solitary twain.

  That prophet saw the coming of the Lord
  Unto the Old, the New, Jerusalem;
  Saw Israel returning at His word
  From wheresoever His will had scattered them;
  The realm's wide ruin saw, and strove to stem.
  That king, sole scion of a slaughtered race,
  Casting his blood-stained sword and diadem,
  Lived but to see another nation place
  Firm foot upon the soil, then vanished from its face.

The advent of the Nephite colony is told in the following manner.

  Again athwart the wilderness of waves,
    Surging old East and older West between,
  Where the lone sea the flowery Southland laves,
    And crowns o'er many climes the Chilean queen,
  Braving the swell, a storm-tossed bark is seen.
    From doomed Jerusalem, to Jacob dear,
  Albeit a leper, groping, blind, unclean,
    Goes forth Manasseh's prophet pioneer,
    Predestined to unveil the hidden hemisphere.

  His lot to reap and plant on this far shore
    The promise of his fathers. Joseph's bough,
  From Jacob's well, the billowy wall runs o'er.
    Abides in strength the archer-stricken bow,
  Unto the utmost bound prevailing now,
    Of Hesper's heaven-inviting hills. Bend sheaves
  Of Israel, as branches bend with snow,
    Unto his sheaf as mightiest; and as leaves
    For multitude, the son the great sire's glory weaves.

The cataclysms which took place in this western world during the
crucifixion and entombment of Messiah and His subsequent advent in the
western world, His teaching the gospel here, and the establishment of
His Church is told by our poet in the following strains.

  All this and more the prescient monarch saw;
  Messiah's self, Jehovah, Him beheld;
  The Lamb of God, in whom was found no flaw,
  Though Hate's black billows round Him surged and
  Life's deathless tree--deathless, though demon-felled;
  The crash resounding to this far-off shore,
  Whose winnowed remnant welcomed Him revealed
  In risen glory, when had ceased the roar
  And raging of the tempest heralds sent before.

  At whose rebuke the haughty mountains bowed,
  Shorn by the whirlwind, sunk, or swept away,
  No more their frown the lowly valleys cowed,
  Rising like billows 'mid the wrathful fray,
  And dashing 'gainst the skies their dusty spray.
  Rocks, boulders, hills, no Titan strength could lift,
  Hurtle as pebbles in the storm-fiend's play.
  Earth opes her jaws, and through the yawning rift,
  Cities, peoples, vanish, of hope, of life, bereft.

  Three hours of tempest and three days of night;
  Thick darkness, thunder-burst, and lightning flash;
  Millions engulfed, millions in prostrate plight,
  Grovelling as slaves that feel or fear the lash,
  Mingling their groans and cries with grind and crash
  Of crags the cyclone's catapult impels,
  Whose shrieking flails the fields and forests thrash.
  Wild o'er the land roused Ocean's anger swells;
  Fierce Flame's prophetic tongue the final doom foretells.

  Three hours of stormful strife;--then all is still.
  Save for a Voice that universe might hear,
  Proclaiming what hath happed as Heaven's high will,
  Dispensing pardon and dispelling fear,
  Drawing the righteous nearer and more near.
  Anon He lifts the curtain of the sky!
  The midday sun no more their minister;
  Greater hath arisen; and glories multiply
  As angels in their gaze earthward and heavenward fly.

  He greets them as a shepherd greets his flock;
  Shows them His wounded side, His hands, His feet;
  Then builds His Church upon the stricken Rock,
  Where flow life's healing waters, limpid, sweet,
  As infant innocence, that joys to meet
  Its great Original. With holy hand
  He ministers, bids death and hell retreat,
  And singles twelve from out the sainted band
  To sow with gospel light the furrowed, tear-worn land.

Then follows the story of the Nephite golden age, and this by a period
of apostasy from God and the final overthrow of the people, concluding
with the coming of the Gentile races to the promised land and the
advent of the Seer, Joseph Smith, who shall make known through the Book
of Mormon the otherwise unknown history of the western world.

  The Gentile comes, as destiny decrees,
    To Joseph's land of wonders held in store.
  Freedom his watchword, sons of Freedom these,
    Like to the favored bands that long before
  A refuge found upon this sheltering shore.
    But champions of right oft wrong the right;
  Oppressed become oppressors in an hour;
    And now, as day that pushes back the night,
    The strong the weak assail, enslave, and put to flight.

  Nor yet can fate forsake them. Japheth's hand
    'Gainst Jacob's wrath-doomed remnant still prevails.
  Tyrants oppress him from the motherland;
    The Lord of hosts a champion arms and mails,
  To match whose might no human power avails;
    Nor grander cause or chieftain e'er came forth.
  Him as its sire a new-born nation hails,
    And fain would crown him, spite his will, his birth,
    Did Heaven vouchsafe such king to shame most kings
        of earth--

  Real though oft recreant sons of Deity,
    Builders, o'erthrowers, of imperial thrones,
  In wrongful act of rightful agency
    Drenching with blood, paving with human bones
  The path to power, gruesome with tears and groans.
    Their lives a failure? God a failure? Nay;
  What'er betide, the soul that sins atones;
    And He who casts the parts all mortals play,
    Succeeds He ever, His the night, and His the day.

  Thine antecedents, thy forerunners, these,
    Prophet of Ephraim, Joseph's namesake seer!
  More than those ancient bridgers of the seas,
    Unveiler of the long-hid hemisphere,
  Whose secret 'tis lies booked and buried here.
    Bring forth that word of Joseph, now to join
  With Judah's word, Messiah's throne to rear;
    That high may rise and holily may shine
    God's house, the pure-in-heart, kingdom of King divine.

The whole Canto, and indeed the whole poem, should be read in order to
get the full beauty and power of the poet's theme, in which the Book of
Mormon is so large a factor of inspiration.

_Summary of Internal Evidences_.

This is all I intend to say directly on the subject of the Internal
Evidences of the truth of the Book of Mormon; what else remains that
could properly fall under this division of the subject will be said in
connection with the answers to objections to the claims of the book.
Before leaving the subject, however, I ask the reader to recall in one
view the various internal evidences considered up to this time, that it
may be remembered how numerous they are, and how strong and conclusive
they are when massed.

The Internal Evidences of the Book of Mormon consist in the following

The book in style and language is consistent with the theory of its

It responds to the demands both of unity and diversity in its style,
under the theory of its structure;

It has all the characteristics of an abridgment;

It meets all the requirements of the circumstances in the matter of
names, originality in names, differences between Jaredite and Nephite
names, and the custom of Hebrew peoples with reference to names;

Its governments are in harmony with the political principles of the age
in which those governments are said to have existed;

The events to which importance is given are such as would be expected
from the character of its writers;

The complexity of its structure is in harmony with the theory of its

It meets the requirements in originality of structure, manner of
coming forth, theory of peopling America, the nativity of its peoples,
accounting for Christian truths in America, and in its doctrines;

Its prophecies, so many and important, so far as the wheels of time
have brought them due, are fulfilled, and others are in course of

It deals with subjects worthy of God to reveal, and important for man
to know;

It has an atmosphere about it, a spirit, that bears witness of its


1. See I. Kings xix.

2. The Prophet's Journal, November 28, 1841.

3. Luke x: 21.

4. James iv: 6. Peter v: 5.


Objections to the Book of Mormon



"_No sane man dreams of maintaining that a religion is true because of
the difficulties which it involves; the utmost that can reasonably be
maintained is that it may be true in spite of them_." [1]

The necessity for a counter theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon
was early recognized. Sectarian Christendom felt that Joseph Smith's
story of the book's origin must be overthrown, else what would come
of this new revelation, this new dispensation of God's word? Joseph
Smith's account of the origin of the book was a direct challenge to
the teachings of modern Christendom that revelation had ceased; that
the awful voice of prophecy would no more be heard; that the volume of
scripture was completed and forever closed; and that the Bible was the
only volume of scripture. Hence Christendom must find some other origin
for this book than that given by Joseph Smith. The first objection then
to be considered is the objection to the book's origin by examining the
counter theories.


_Alexander Campbell's Theory_:

Alexander Campbell, founder of the sect of the "Disciples," or
"Campbellites," as they are more commonly called, was the first who in
any formal, public manner assailed the Book of Mormon, and proposed a
counter theory of its origin than that given by Joseph Smith.

Alexander Campbell was born in Ireland, 1788, but educated at Glasgow
University, Scotland, where he graduated with the title of Doctor of
Divinity. He came to the United States in 1809, settling in Bethany,
Virginia, and for some time filled the position of pastor of the
Presbyterian church at that place. He soon parted from this communion,
however, and began religious work on independent lines; and organized
a society whose doctrine was that the Bible should be the sole creed
of the church. This led to the establishment of a "Reformed Baptist
Church," which finally took the name of "Disciples" or "Christians."
Mr. Campbell has generally been accounted--and indeed was--one of the
most learned divines of the country and century in which he lived. He
founded a college at Bethany, Virginia; and was also the founder of the
"Christian Baptist," which finally merged (1830) into the "Millennial
Harbinger," both as their titles indicate being religious periodicals.
He was the author of a number of works on religious subjects, but is
generally remembered through his public debates with Robert Owen, the
celebrated English Deist and social reformer; Archbishop Purcell, of
the Roman Catholic Church, whose diocese was Cincinnati and vicinity;
Rev. N. L. Rice, of the Presbyterian Church; and the Rev. William

It will be seen from the foregoing sketch of this celebrated man, that
so far as scholarship and trained ability in religious controversy is
concerned, he was competent to analyze and make a severe criticism of
the Book of Mormon. Before going into that, however, I think there
is one other fact bearing on his career that should be noted. It
will perhaps be remembered that Walter Scott and Sidney Rigdon were
associated with Mr. Campbell in his reform operations in the state
of Pennsylvania and Ohio. Up to 1830, the last named gentleman was
as energetic in the interests of the "Disciples" as Mr. Scott or Mr.

Cardinal points in the reformation proposed by these gentlemen were,
first: the recognition of the Bible as the only creed of the church;
and after that faith in God and Christ, and the Holy Spirit; repentance
of sin, and baptism in water by immersion for the remission of sins.
It will be seen at once that in these doctrines the reformers were
really preaching a number of the first principles and ordinances of
the gospel; and when Sidney Rigdon became interested in Mormonism and
visited the Prophet Joseph in New York, December, 1830, a revelation
was given through the Prophet to Sidney Rigdon, in which the Lord
claimed this reform work, in a way, as his:

    Behold, verily, verily, I say unto my servant Sidney, I have looked
    upon thee and thy works. I have heard thy prayers and prepared
    thee for a greater work. Thou art blessed, for thou shalt do great
    things. Behold, thou wast sent forth, even as John, to prepare
    the way before me, and before Elijah which should come, and thou
    knewest it not. Thou didst baptize by water unto repentance,
    but they received not the Holy Ghost. But now I give unto thee
    a commandment, that thou shalt baptize by water, and they shall
    receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, even as the
    apostles of old. [2]

From this it appears that Sidney Rigdon was unconsciously inspired of
God in teaching faith, repentance, and baptism for the remission of
sins. In evidence that the work of these reformers was a preparatory
work to the coming forth of the fullness of the gospel, I may say that
perhaps more people joined the Church in an early day from this sect of
"Disciples" than from any other denomination whatsoever. But if Sidney
Rigdon was inspired of God in this work, and was sent forth even as
John the Baptist to prepare the way for the incoming of a still greater
work, may it not also be true that Alexander Campbell was inspired of
God, and in like manner sent forth to prepare the way for the coming
forth of the greater work? Undoubtedly; for if Sidney Rigdon could be
thus sent forth, one could easily believe that Alexander Campbell,
with his larger knowledge and greater capacity, would more likely be
sent forth on such a mission. When, however, the new dispensation of
the gospel was brought to his attention, and he came in contact with
the Book of Mormon, instead of accepting it, as Sidney Rigdon did, he
rejected it; pride of opinion, pride of intellectual attainments, pride
as a leader of men, and the founder of a sect are doubtless the causes
which induced the spiritual darkness that prevented him from seeing the
truth; or, if he saw it, prevented him from accepting it; and hence he
chose to reject it, and assail it, and for a number of years was its
most pronounced antagonist.

I have already remarked upon the educational and intellectual abilities
of Mr. Campbell as fitting him for the work of thorough analysis and
criticism of the Book of Mormon; but when one compares his criticism
of the book with his debate with Robert Owen, in which he makes a most
masterful defense of historic Christianity; or with his debate with
Archbishop Purcell which, at the time it took place, was called "The
Battle of the Giants"--one can but feel that his performance with
reference to the Book of Mormon was wholly unworthy of him. Unworthy
both of his great intellect and high character. In his assault upon
that book there is a bitterness, and even a vulgarity, entirely
absent from his other works, and utterly unaccountable for, unless
one can think that in the background of his consciousness there was a
realization that the work he assailed was true, and hence his assault
is tinged with a bitterness likely to result from such a circumstance.

I shall have occasion to refer to several, in fact to all of Mr.
Campbell's objections, in the course of this division of my treatise,
but at present I shall confine myself to his theory of the Book of
Mormon's origin.

His theory respecting the origin of the book was that Joseph Smith was
its author. This he repeats at various places in his criticism.

"Smith," he says, "its real author, as ignorant and as impudent a knave
as ever wrote a book, betrays the cloven foot in basing his whole book
upon a false fact, or a pretended fact, which makes God a lair," etc.


    The book proposes to be written at intervals and by different
    persons during the long period of 1020 years, and yet for
    uniformity of style, there never was a book more evidently written
    by one set of fingers, nor more certainly conceived in one cranium
    since the first book appeared in human language, than this same
    book. If I could swear to any man's voice, face, or person,
    assuming different names, I could swear that this book was written
    by one man. And as Joseph Smith is a very ignorant man, and is
    called the "author" on the title page, I cannot doubt for a single
    moment but that he is sole author and proprietor of it. [3]

From this it appears that the reasons which induced Alexander Campbell
to conclude that Joseph Smith was the "sole author and proprietor" of
the Book of Mormon, are,

First: that he is called the Author and Proprietor of it on the title
page, [4] and

Second: that there is a uniformity of style throughout the book.

The reason for Joseph Smith calling himself "Author and Proprietor"
of the Book of Mormon is easily accounted for. The copyright law of
the United States, in force at the time of the publication of the
Book of Mormon, secured the rights to copies of maps, charts, and
books, "to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the
times therein mentioned," but the law said nothing respecting the
rights of translators of books, hence Joseph Smith adopted the legal
phraseology of the law, and secured the copyright to the Book of Mormon
as "author and proprietor," since he could not obtain the copyright as
"translator." [5]

That Joseph Smith from the first claimed only to be the translator of
the Book of Mormon is evident from the preface to the first edition,
where he says:

"I would inform you that I '_translated_' by the gift and power of God,
and caused to be written 116 pages [of manuscript] which I took from
the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi
by the hand of Mormon," etc.

Throughout the preface he speaks of his work as a "translation." So
that it cannot be said that Joseph Smith claimed at any time to be
other than a translator of the work, hence any argument based upon
Joseph Smith announcing himself as "author and proprietor" of the Book
of Mormon merely to comply with the phraseology of the copyright law,
is technical and without force. [6]

As to the argument based upon the uniformity of literary style
throughout the book, I have already called attention to the
requirements both of unity and diversity of style, resulting in the
conclusion that the construction of the book does not require a wide
diversity of literary style, because of the fact that it is composed
chiefly of four writers, two living in the sixth century B. C., and the
other two living 400 A. D. [7]

Moreover, it is conceded in these pages that the translation by Joseph
Smith was made in such language and literary style as he was competent
to execute, and hence uniformity in literary style is to be looked for
in the translation since the English is his. [8]

Campbell's theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon, nothwithstanding
his learning and acknowledged literary ability, failed to be
convincing; the evidence of the fact is seen in this that his theory
was soon abandoned for another, hence it can be concluded that it was
entirely unsatisfactory--that is, failed. Indeed Mr. Campbell himself,
as soon as the "Spaulding Theory" of the book's origin was launched,
abandoned his own and gave to that his support. [9]


_The Spaulding Theory of the Origin of the Book of Mormon._

Taking its source in Erie county, Pennsylvania, and flowing generally
in a north-westerly course into Ohio, thence northward through
Ashtabula county, Ohio, until it empties into Lake Erie, is Conneaut
Creek. It meanders through a country somewhat rich in mounds and other
evidences of the existence of civilized races that anciently inhabited
America. Very naturally the people inhabiting that section of the
country were interested in these subjects. Here resided in the early
years of the nineteenth century one Solomon Spaulding, a graduate,
it is said, of Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. According
to those who have recorded his history, he was born in Ashford,
Connecticut, 1761, and graduated at Dartmouth in 1785 with the degree
of A. B. He subsequently studied theology, and began preaching in 1800,
but on account of failing health he went into the merchandise business
at Cherry Valley, New York. He failed in merchandising, and moved to
New Salem, Ashtabula county, Ohio, 1807 or 1808.

New Salem is on the banks of the Conneaut Creek, and sometimes is
called "Conneaut." Here Spaulding went into the iron foundry business,
but failed in that also. In 1809 he began writing a religious romance,
incited to the undertaking by reason of the numerous evidences of the
civilized races by which he was surrounded at Conneaut. This work,
from the concensus of the recollections of those who claimed to have
heard portions of it read, he called the "Manuscript Found," from the
circumstance of his romance being based upon the pretended finding of
the manuscript of it in a cave in the vicinity of New Salem. It feigned
also to give an account of the migration of a colony to America in
ancient times.

Mr. Spaulding continued to live in New Salem until 1812, when he
removed from that place to Pittsburg, Penn., where it is supposed that
he resided some two years. It is claimed that while living here Mr.
Spaulding placed his manuscript story in the hands of a Mr. Patterson,
a printer and publisher of Pittsburg, who retained it for some time;
read it and urged Mr. Spaulding to write a title page and preface for
it, saying that he would publish it, and that it might be "a source of
profit." This, for some unaccountable reason, Mr. Spaulding refused
to do. At length the manuscript was returned to its author, "and soon
after," said Mrs. Spaulding in a narrative attributed to her, "we moved
to Amity, Washington county, Penn., where Mr. Spaulding in 1816 died."

It is claimed, by the advocates of this Spaulding theory of the origin
of the Book of Mormon, that Sidney Rigdon, through a Mr. Lambdin, an
employe of Patterson's publishing establishment, became acquainted
with this manuscript story; "borrowed" it and copied it, as some say;
"stole" it according to the theory of others. Afterwards by some
means unexplained, and as I think unexplainable, Sidney Rigdon, it
is claimed, became associated with Joseph Smith living in Manchester
Township, New York, or in Susquehanna county, Pennsylvania--from 250
to 300 miles distant from any point where Sidney Rigdon resided during
those years when the Book of Mormon was coming forth,--collaborated
with him, and published Spaulding's romance, with religious doctrinal
matter added by Rigdon, as the Book of Mormon. This is the theory
most generally accepted by those who recognize the importance of
overthrowing the account of the book's origin given by Joseph Smith.

I wish now to call attention to the circumstance under which this
theory came to be substituted for the much more tenable, though
inadequate one, advanced some years earlier by Alexander Campbell.

This settlement on Conneaut Creek, called New Salem, was on the route
usually traveled by the Saints and Elders in their journey from New
York to Kirtland, Ohio, and from Kirtland, Ohio, to the branches of the
Church, established in Canada, New York, and Pennsylvania, hence the
people of that neighborhood were frequently brought in contact with
Mormonism, and the story of its origin was often before them.

In the fall of 1833, a number of affidavits were taken from the
former neighbors and friends of Solomon Spaulding, and one was given
by his brother, John Spaulding, and one by the latter's wife, Martha
Spaulding. They at the time were residing at Crawford, Pennsylvania,
and both testified they had "recently read the Book of Mormon," and
recognized in it the general outlines of Solomon Spaulding's story,
claiming especially to remember the names "Nephi and Lehi;" the words
"Nephites and Lamanites;" and also the ancient scriptural style and the
frequent use of the phrase "and it came to pass;" and that the American
Indians are descendants of the Jews, or "lost tribes of Israel."

Mr. Henry Lake, an associate in business with Mr. Spaulding, living
at Conneaut in the fall of 1833, in connection with others that will
be named, living in the same neighborhood, testified that Solomon
Spaulding read to him the "Manuscript Found;" that it represented the
American Indians as the descendants of the "lost tribes" of Israel, and
that he suggested to Mr. Spaulding that the frequent use of the phrase
"and it came to pass" rendered the book ridiculous.

John N. Miller testified substantially to the same things saying in
addition that Spaulding's story landed his colony near the "Straits of
Darien," which he was confident he called "Zarahemla."

Aaron Wright testified to substantially the same things as the
foregoing. That the American Indians, according to Spaulding's story,
were descendants of the "lost tribes" of Israel, and claims especially
that the historical part of the Book of Mormon is substantially what he
heard read from the "Manuscript Found," though he excepts out of the
work, as not being Spaulding's, the religious matter.

Oliver Smith testified substantially to the same things, saying in
effect that on reading the Book of Mormon he at once recognized it as
the writings of Solomon Spaulding.

Nahum Howard, testified that he had recently read the Book of Mormon,
and believed that all but the religious part of it was the same as that
written by Spaulding.

Artemas Cunningham, living in Perry, Geauga county, Ohio, testified
that in 1811 he waited upon Solomon Spaulding at his home in New Salem,
to collect debts, and that the latter read to him on that occasion some
parts of his manuscript story, partially examining the Book of Mormon
he became convinced that Spaulding had written its outlines before he
left Conneaut. [10]

It is upon the testimony of these parties that the Spaulding theory
rests. Subsequently many others claimed to have information upon the
subject, and gave statements to newspapers almost _ad infinitum_,
constantly varying the claims and adding items that so burdened the
theory with inconsistencies and contradictions that it breaks down, as
we shall see, under the accumulation. But now as to the manner in which
this theory came to be exploited.

As in former dispensations of the gospel, so in this last dispensation,
the gospel net gathers of all kinds. Some are fit for the Master's
use, and some fit only to be cast back into the world, as worthless
fish are cast back into the sea. Of such was one "Doctor" Philastus
Hurlburt. He made his first appearance in Kirtland in the early
spring of 1833, where, after investigating Mormonism, he accepted
it, and on the 18th of March of that year was ordained an Elder.
Soon afterwards he went on a brief mission to the east, where he was
guilty of unchristianlike conduct in his deportment with women. On
his return to Kirtland he was confronted with this charge, and at a
conference of High Priests was deprived of his license as an Elder,
and excommunicated from the Church. From this decision he appealed to
the Council of the First Presidency, and because of his confession and
apparent repentance he was restored. Shortly afterwards, however, he
boasted of having deceived both the Prophet and the council, and he was
again excommunicated from the Church, after which he avowed himself the
enemy of the Prophet Joseph and of Mormonism, and sought by all means
within his power to destroy both. His threats against the Prophet's
life became so violent that he was arraigned before the court in
Chardon, the county seat of Geauga county, and bound over in the sum of
two hundred dollar bonds, to keep the peace, and to pay the cost of the
proceedings. [11]

The title of "Doctor" given to this man, and which when rightfully held
gives evidence of respectability as well as of professional standing,
did not grow out of the fact that he was a physician, nor was it a
little of honor at all with him, but was given to him because he was
the "seventh son" in his family, who, according to the old folklore,
should be made a physician, hence he was called "Doc" or "Doctor."
According to the statement of Joseph E. Johnson, who was acquainted
with him at Kirtland, Hurlburt was a man of fine physique, very good
looking but pompous and ambitious, which lead him to seek position in
the Church and solicit marriage with the "first families;" but his evil
character thwarted all such efforts.

It is this man who is chiefly responsible for the Spaulding theory
of the origin of the Book of Mormon. Having heard of Spaulding's
"Manuscript Found" on Conneaut Creek, he immediately entered into
negotiations with the Prophet's enemies in and about Kirtland, and by
them was employed to gather up the statements to which reference has
been made, as also, if possible, to secure the Spaulding manuscript for
the purpose of comparing it with the Book of Mormon. He also went to
the former home of the Prophet, for the purpose of collecting all the
scandal and rumors that could be gathered up or manufactured against
the Smith family; as also all the stories and neighborhood gossip which
became current about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. Meantime,
however, the true character of Hurlburt became so generally known
and was so unsavory, that those who had employed him to gather this
material for the contemplated anti-Mormon book found it necessary to
drop Hurlburt, and leave the publication in the hands of others.

Among those who had interested themselves in these plans for the
destruction of the Book of Mormon and the Church, was E. D. Howe, of
Painsville, Ohio. Painsville is but a few miles distant northwest of
Kirtland. One of Mr. Howe's reasons for anger against the Church was
the fact that both his wife and sister had become converts to the new
faith. He purchased the materials that had been gathered for Hurlburt's
Anti-Mormon book, and published them under the title of "Mormonism
Unveiled," (1834). It is the first Anti-Mormon book of any pretentions,
and has been the chief source of "information" for all the Anti-Mormon
publications which have followed it, that pretend to relate at all the
early events connected with the coming forth of the great latter-day
work. It took some six years to dispose of the first edition, as the
second edition was not issued until 1840. So little influence, however,
did "Mormonism Unveiled" have that many people in the very region of
its origin continued to accept the Book of Mormon, and became members
of the Church of the Latter-day Saints.

After the publication of Howe's book in 1834, there were no further
developments in the Spaulding Theory until May, 1839, when attention
was again called to it through the publication of what purported to be
either an affidavit or signed statement [12] by Mrs. Matilda Davison.
This lady was formerly Solomon Spaulding's wife, and lived with him
until his death in 1816. Four years later she married Mr. Davison,
and at the time of the publication of the signed statement here
referred to, was living with her daughter, Mrs. M'Kenstry, at Monson,
Massachusetts. Her statement follows:


    As the Book of Mormon, or Golden Bible (as it was originally
    called) has excited much attention, and is deemed by a certain new
    sect of equal authority with the Sacred Scriptures, I think it a
    duty which I owe to the public to state what I know touching its

    That its claims to a divine origin are wholly unfounded needs no
    proof to a mind unperverted by the grossest illusions. That any
    sane person should rank it higher than any other merely human
    composition is a matter of the greatest astonishment; yet it is
    received as divine by some who dwell in enlightened New England,
    and even by those who have sustained the character of devoted
    Christians. Learning recently that Mormonism had found its way
    into a church in Massachusetts, and has impregnated some with its
    gross delusions, so that excommunication has been necessary, I am
    determined to delay no longer in doing what I can to strip the mask
    from this mother of sin, and to lay open this pit of abominations.

    Solomon Spaulding, to whom I was united in marriage in early life,
    was a graduate of Dartmouth College, and was distinguished for a
    lively imagination, and a great fondness for history. At the time
    of our marriage he resided in Cherry Valley, New York. From this
    place we removed to New Salem, Ashtabula county, Ohio, sometimes
    called Conneaut, as it is situated on Conneaut Creek. Shortly after
    our removal to this place, his health sunk, and he was laid aside
    from active labors. In the town of New Salem there are numerous
    mounds and forts supposed by many to be the dilapidated dwellings
    and fortifications of a race now extinct. These ancient relics
    arrest the attention of the new settlers, and become objects of
    research for the curious. Numerous implements were found, and
    other articles evincing great skill in the arts. Mr. Spaulding
    being an educated man, and passionately fond of history, took a
    lively interest in these developments of antiquity; and in order
    to beguile the hours of retirement and furnish employment for his
    lively imagination, he conceived the idea of giving an historical
    sketch of this long lost race. Their extreme antiquity led him to
    write in the most ancient style, and as the Old Testament is the
    most ancient book in the world, he imitated its style as nearly as
    possible. His sole object in writing this imaginary history was
    to amuse himself and his neighbors. This was about the year 1812.
    Hull's surrender at Detroit occurred near the same time, and I
    recollect the date well from that circumstance. As he progressed
    in his narrative the neighbors would come in from time to time to
    hear portions read, and a great interest in the work was excited
    among them. It claimed to have been written by one of the lost
    nation, and to have been recovered from the earth, and assumed the
    title of "Manuscript Found." The neighbors would often inquire
    how Mr. Spaulding progressed in deciphering the manuscript; and
    when he had sufficient portion prepared, he would inform them,
    and they would assemble to hear it read. He was enabled, from his
    acquaintance with the classics and ancient history, to introduce
    many singular names, which were particularly noticed by the people,
    and could be easily recognized by them. Mr. Solomon Spaulding had
    a brother, Mr. John Spaulding, residing in the place at the time,
    who was perfectly familiar with the work, and repeatedly heard
    the whole of it read. From New Salem we removed to Pittsburg, in
    Pennsylvania. Here Mr. Spaulding found a friend and acquaintance, in
    the person of Mr. Patterson, an editor of a newspaper. He exhibited
    his manuscript to Mr. Patterson, who was very much pleased with it,
    and borrowed it for perusal. He retained it for a long time, and
    informed Mr. Spaulding that if he would make out a title page and
    preface, he would publish it, and it might be a source of profit.
    This Mr. Spaulding refused to do. Sidney Rigdon, who has figured so
    largely in the history of the Mormons, was at that time connected
    with the printing office of Mr. Patterson, as is well known in
    that region, and as Rigdon himself has frequently stated, became
    acquainted with Mr. Spaulding's manuscript, and copied it. It was a
    matter of notoriety and interest to all connected with the printing
    establishment. At length the manuscript was returned to its author,
    and soon after we removed to Amity, Washington county, etc., where
    Mr. Spaulding deceased in 1816. The manuscript then fell into my
    hands, and was carefully preserved. It has frequently been examined
    by my daughter, Mrs. M'Kenstry, of Monson, Mass., with whom I now
    reside, and by other friends.

    After the Book of Mormon came out, a copy of it was taken to New
    Salem, the place of Mr. Spaulding's former residence, and the very
    place where the "Manuscript Found" was written. A woman preacher
    appointed a meeting there; and in the meeting read and repeated
    copious extracts from the Book of Mormon. The historical part
    was immediately recognized by all the older inhabitants, as the
    identical work of Mr. Spaulding, in which they had all been so
    deeply interested years before. Mr. John Spaulding was present
    and recognized perfectly the work of his brother. He was amazed
    and afflicted that it should have been perverted to so wicked a
    purpose. His grief found vent in a flood of tears, and he arose
    on the spot, and expressed to the meeting his sorrow and regret
    that the writings of his deceased brother should be used for a
    purpose so vile and shocking. The excitement in New Salem became so
    great that the inhabitants had a meeting and deputed Dr. Philastus
    Hurlburt, one of their number, to repair to this place and to
    obtain from me the original manuscript of Mr. Spaulding, for the
    purpose of comparing it with the Mormon Bible, to satisfy their
    own minds, and to prevent their friends from embracing an error so
    delusive. This was in the year 1834. Dr. Hurlburt brought with him
    an introduction and request for the manuscript, which was signed
    by Messrs. Henry Lake, Aaron Wright, and others, with all of whom
    I was acquainted, as they were my neighbors when I resided at
    New Salem. I am sure that nothing would grieve my husband more,
    were he living, than the use which has been made of his work.
    The air of antiquity which was thrown about the composition,
    doubtless suggested the idea of converting it to the purposes of
    delusion. Thus an historical romance, with the addition of a few
    pious expressions, and extracts from the sacred Scriptures, has
    been construed into a new Bible, and palmed off upon a company of
    poor deluded fanatics as divine. I have given the previous brief
    narration that this work of deep deception and wickedness may be
    searched to the foundation and the authors exposed to the contempt
    and execration they so justly deserve.


This statement was published at the instance of Dr. John Storrs, a
Congregational minister of Holliston, Massachusetts. The incentive for
his action was the fact that a number of his congregation had become
converts to the Mormon faith and he was angry. [13] Mrs. Davison,
however, denied ever having given such a signed statement, as appears
from the following communication published in the "Quincy Whig," at
Quincy, Illinois. It was published in the Illinois paper shortly after
the "Davison Statement" appeared in the "Boston Recorder," under the
following title:


    It will be recollected that a few months since an article appeared
    in several of the papers, purporting to give an account of the
    origin of the Book of Mormon. How far the writer of that piece has
    effected his purposes, or what his purposes were in pursuing the
    course he has, I shall not attempt to say at this time, but shall
    call upon every candid man to judge in this matter for himself, and
    shall content myself by presenting before the public the other side
    of the question in the form of a letter, as follows:

    Copy of a letter written by Mr. John Haven, of Holliston, Middlesex
    Co., Massachusetts, to his daughter, Elizabeth Haven, of Quincy,
    Adams Co., Illinois.

    Your brother Jesse passed through Monson where he saw Mrs. Davison
    and her daughter Mrs. McKenstry and also Dr. Ely and spent several
    hours with them, during which time he asked them the following
    questions, viz.:

    "Question.--Did you, Mrs. Davison, write a letter to John Storrs,
    giving an account of the origin of the Book of Mormon?

    Answer.--I did not.

    Q.--Did you sign your name to it?

    A.--I did not, neither did I ever see the letter until I saw it in
    the "Boston Recorder," the letter was never brought to me to sign.

    Q.--What agency had you in having this letter sent to Mr. Storrs?

    A.--D. R. Austin came to my house and asked me some questions, took
    some minutes on paper, and from these minutes wrote that letter.

    Q.--Is what is written in the letter true?

    A.--In the main it is.

    Q. Have you read the Book of Mormon?

    A.--I have read some in it.

    Q.--Does Mr. Spaulding's manuscript and the Book of Mormon agree?

    A.--I think some few of the names are alike.

    Q.--Does the manuscript describe an idolatrous or a religious

    A.--An idolatrous people?

    Q.--Where is the manuscript?

    A.--D. P. Hurlburt came here and took it, said he would get it
    printed and let me have one-half the profits.

    Q.--Has D. P. Hurlburt got the manuscript printed?

    A.--I received a letter stating that it did not read as he
    expected, and he should not print it.

    Q.--How large is Mr. Spaulding's manuscript?

    A.--About one-third as large as the Book of Mormon.

    Q.--To Mrs. McKinstry: How old were you when your father wrote the

    A.--About five years of age.

    Q.--Did you ever read the manuscript?

    A.--When I was about twelve years old I used to read it for

    Q.--Did the manuscript describe an idolatrous or a religious people?

    A.--An idolatrous people.

    Q.--Does the manuscript and the Book of Mormon agree?

    A.--I think some of the names agree.

    Q.--Are you certain that some of the names agree?

    A.--I am not.

    Q.--Have you read any in the Book of Mormon?

    A.--I have not.

    Q.--Was your name attached to that letter, which was sent to Mr.
    John Storrs, by your order?

    A.--No, I never meant that my name should be there.

    You see by the above questions and answers, that Mr. Austin, in his
    great zeal to destroy the Latter-day Saints, has asked Mrs. Davison
    a few questions, then wrote a letter to Mr. Storrs, in his own
    language. I do not say that the above questions and answers were
    given in the form that I have written them, but these questions
    were asked, and these answers given. Mrs. Davison is about seventy
    years of age, and somewhat broke."

    This may certify that I am personally acquainted with Mr. Haven,
    his son and daughter, and am satisfied they are persons of truth.
    I have also read Mr. Haven's letter to his daughter, which has
    induced me to copy it for publication, and I further say, the above
    is a correct copy of Mr. Haven's letter.

    (Signed) A. BADLAM. [14]

The foregoing statement from the "Quincy Whig" is considerably
strengthened by a work published by "Funk & Wagnalls" (1885), by Mrs.
Ellen E. Dickinson, a grand daughter of Willian H. Sabine, a brother
of Mrs. (Spaulding) Davison. Mrs. Dickenson, whose work is called
"New Light on Mormonism," devotes a number of her chapters to the
elaboration of the Spaulding theory, and in an appendix publishes
twenty-seven documents bearing upon the subject of the Spaulding
manuscript; but nowhere, either in the body of her work or in this
appendix, publishes the alleged statement of Mrs. Davison, which is
pretty clear evidence that the statement was never given by Mrs.
Davison nor authorized by her. Mrs. Dickinson from the amount of
research she devoted to the subject could not have been ignorant of
its existence, and more especially as she was a relative of Mrs.
Davison--grand-niece--and wrote her book as the representative of the
Spaulding relatives to set forth the Spaulding theory in its proper
light. [15] Of course had Mrs. Davison done her full duty in the
premises as an author, she would have made reference to this forged
statement credited to her grand-aunt and repudiated it in her name;
but this she failed to do. However, her silence with reference to this
statement and her failure to place it in her collection of documents on
the subject, amounts to the same thing--a repudiation of it.

But even if Mrs. Davison's repudiation of the article, to which her
name was attached by others, did not exist, and if the repudiation of
it by her grand-niece by refusing it admission into her collection of
documents on the Spaulding theory did not exist, there is enough in the
statement itself to establish its utter unreliability. These are:

First: The description of the manner in which John Spaulding, brother
of Solomon Spaulding, learned of the identity between the Book of
Mormon and his brother's "Manuscript Found." According to the "Davison
statement," he was at New Salem when a public speaker read excerpts
from the Book of Mormon, and immediately recognized the work of his
brother. Whereupon, his amazement and grief found vent in "a flood
of tears," and he rose "on the spot" and expressed his sorrow and
regrets that his brother's writings should be used for a purpose so
"vile and shocking." In the statement of John Spaulding, published in
Howe's "Mormonism Unveiled," there is nothing of all this dramatic
circumstance. In that statement [16] there is no agony of grief; no
flood of tears; no denunciation on the spot; no reference to a purpose
"vile and shocking;" just a plain statement that he had "recently
read the Book of Mormon;" and the claim that he found nearly the same
historical matter in it as in his brother's writings; some names that
were alike, and that the "Manuscript Found" held to the theory that the
American Indians were descendants of the "lost tribes;" and evidently
supposes that the Book of Mormon held the same theory. Had any such
circumstance as described in the "Davison Statement" occurred, it would
undoubtedly have appeared in John Spaulding's statement published by
Howe five years before this second version was put forth. Had such
incidents really taken place, they would have been too rich in dramatic
incident to have escaped the publishers of "Mormonism Unveiled."

Second: The "Davison Statement" represents that it was through a "woman
preacher" that the Book of Mormon was represented at the public meeting
at New Salem, where John Spaulding denounced it on the spot. It is well
known that the Church of the Latter-day Saints at that time had no
"woman preacher," hence no such circumstance could have occurred. [17]

Third: The "Davison Statement" represents Sidney Rigdon as being
connected with the printing office of Mr. Patterson, of Pittsburg, but
strangest of all it represents that gentleman as having frequently
admitted that connection, whereas, as we shall see later, Sidney Rigdon
every where and at all times expressly denied any such connection.

These inconsistencies of the "Davison Statement" with the well known
facts in the case reveal its utterly fraudulent character; and here
we may pause just long enough to remark the desperate straits the
opponents of the Book of Mormon were driven to in those days, when they
must needs resort to such methods of opposition as are apparent in this
bogus statement. Does it not cast suspicion upon the whole Spaulding
theory? A suspicion which not all the supposed respectability that goes
with titles of "Doctor of Divinity," "Reverend," "Ministers of the
Gospel," etc., can remove?

After this attempt to galvanize into life the Spaulding theory by the
Reverend John Storrs,--by methods, as we have seen, that were infamous!--it
slumbered until the year 1880, when Mrs. Ellen E. Dickinson, the
grand-niece of Mrs. Davison, again revived it by the publication of an
article in "_Scribner's Magazine_" for August of that year. The chief
item of interest in Mrs. Dickenson's publication was an affidavit by
Mrs. M. S. McKenstry, the daughter of Solomon Spaulding, who claimed to
have some childhood recollections of her father's manuscript story. Her
affidavit follows:


    Washington, D. C., April 3, 1880.

    So much has been published that is erroneous concerning "The
    Manuscript Found," written by my father, the Rev. Solomon
    Spaulding, and its supposed connection with the book called the
    Mormon Bible, I have willingly consented to make the following
    statement regarding it, repeating all that I remember personally
    of this manuscript, and all that is of importance which my mother
    related to me in connection with it, at the same time affirming
    that I am in tolerable health and vigor, and that my memory, in
    common with elderly people, is clearer in regard to the events of
    my earlier years rather than those of my maturer life.

    During the war of 1812 I was residing with my parents in a little
    town in Ohio called Conneaut. I was then in my sixth year. My
    father was in business there, and I remember his iron foundry and
    the men he had at work, but that he remained at home most of the
    time, and was reading and writing a great deal. He frequently
    wrote little stories, which he read to me. There were some round
    mounds of earth near our house which greatly interested him, and
    he said a tree on the top of one of them was a thousand years old.
    He set some of his men to work digging into one of these mounds,
    and I vividly remember how excited he became when he heard that
    they had exhumed some human bones, portions of gigantic skeletons,
    and various relics. He talked with my mother of these discoveries
    in the mound, and was writing every day as the work progressed.
    Afterwards he read the manuscript which I had seen him writing,
    to the neighbors, and to the clergyman, a friend of his who came
    to see him. Some of the names that he mentioned while reading to
    these people I have never forgotten. They are as fresh to me today
    as though I heard them yesterday. They were "Mormon," "Maroni,"
    "Lamenite," [18] "Nephi."

    We removed from Conneaut to Pittsburg while I was still very young,
    but every circumstance of this removal is distinct in my memory. In
    that city my father had an intimate friend named Patterson, and I
    frequently visited Mr. Patterson's library with him, and heard my
    father talk about books with him. In 1816 my father died at Amity,
    Penn., and directly after his death my mother and myself went to
    visit at the residence of my mother's brother, William H. Sabine,
    at Onondaga Valley, Onondaga Co., N. Y. Mr. Sabine was a lawyer of
    distinction and wealth, and greatly respected. We carried all our
    personal effects with us, and one of these was an old trunk, in
    which my mother had placed all my father's writings which had been
    preserved. I perfectly remember the appearance of this trunk, and
    of looking at its contents. There were sermons and other papers,
    and I saw a manuscript about an inch thick, closely written, tied
    with some of the stories my father had written for me, one of which
    he called "The Frogs of Wyndham." On the outside of this manuscript
    were written the words, "Manuscript Found." I did not read it,
    but looked through it, and had it in my hands many times, and saw
    the names I had heard at Conneaut, when my father read it to his
    friends. I was about eleven years of age at this time.

    After we had been at my uncle's for some time my mother left me
    there and went to her father's house at Pomfret, Conn., but did
    not take her furniture nor the old trunk of manuscripts with
    her. In 1820 she married Mr. Davison, of Hartwicks, a village
    near Cooperstown, N. Y., and sent for the things she had left
    at Onondaga Valley, and I remember that the old trunk with its
    contents, reached her in safety. In 1828 I was married to Dr. A.
    McKinstry, of Monson, Hampden Co., Mass., and went there to reside.
    Very soon after my mother joined me there, and was with me most of
    the time until her death, in 1844. We heard, not long after she
    came to live with me--I do not remember just how long--something of
    Mormonism, and the report that it had been taken from my father's
    "Manuscript Found;" and then came to us direct an account of the
    Mormon meeting at Conneaut, Ohio, and that, on one occasion, when
    the Mormon Bible was read there in public, my father's brother,
    John Spaulding, Mr. Lake and many other persons who were present,
    at once recognized its similarity to "The Manuscript Found," which
    they had heard read years before by my father in the same town.
    There was a great deal of talk and a great deal published at this
    time about Mormonism all over the country. I believe it was in 1834
    that a man named Hurlburt came to my house at Monson to see my
    mother, who told us that he had been sent by a committee to procure
    "The Manuscript Found," written by the Rev. Solomon Spaulding, so
    as to compare it with the Mormon Bible. He presented a letter to
    my mother from my uncle, William H. Sabine, of Onondaga Valley,
    in which he requested her to loan this manuscript to Hurlburt, as
    he (my uncle) was desirous "to uproot" (as he expressed it) "this
    Mormon fraud." Hurlburt represented that he had been a convert
    to Mormonism, but had given it up, and through "The Manuscript
    Found" wished to expose its wickedness. My mother was careful to
    have me with her in all the conversations she had with Hurlburt,
    who spent a day at my house. She did not like his appearance, and
    mistrusted his motives; but having great respect for her brother's
    wishes and opinions, she reluctantly consented to his request.
    The old trunk, containing the desired "Manuscript Found," she had
    placed in the care of Mr. Jerome Clark, of Hartwicks, when she came
    to Monson, intending to send for it. On the repeated promise of
    Hurlburt to return the manuscript to us, she gave him a letter to
    Mr. Clark to open the trunk and deliver it to him. We afterwards
    heard that he did receive it from Mr. Clark at Hartwicks, but from
    that time we have never had it in our possession, and I have no
    present knowledge of its existence, Hurlburt never returning it or
    answering letters requesting him to do so. Two years ago I heard
    he was still living in Ohio, and with my consent he was asked for
    "The Manuscript Found." He made no response, although we have
    evidence that he received the letter containing the request. So far
    I have stated facts within my own knowledge. My mother mentioned
    many other circumstances to me in connection with this subject
    which are interesting, of my father's literary tastes, his fine
    education, and peculiar temperament. She stated to me that she had
    heard the manuscript alluded to read by my father, was familiar
    with its contents, and she deeply regretted that her husband, as
    she believed, had innocently been the means of furnishing matter
    for a religious delusion. She said that my father loaned this
    "Manuscript Found" to Mr. Patterson, of Pittsburg, and that, when
    he returned it to my father, he said: "Polish it up, finish it, and
    you will make money out of it." My mother confirmed my remembrances
    of my father's fondness for history, and told me of his frequent
    conversations regarding a theory which he had of a prehistoric
    race which had inhabited this continent, etc., all showing that
    his mind dwelt on this subject. "The Manuscript Found," she said,
    was a romance written in Biblical style, and that while she heard
    it read she had no especial admiration for it more than for other
    romances he wrote and read to her. We never, either of us, ever
    saw, or in any way communicated with the Mormons, save Hurlburt, as
    above described; and while we had no personal knowledge that the
    Mormon Bible was taken from "The Manuscript Found," there were many
    evidences to us that it was, and that Hurlburt and others at the
    time thought so. A convincing proof to us of this belief was that
    my uncle, William H. Sabine, had undoubtedly read the manuscript
    which was in his house, and his faith that its production would
    show to the world that the Mormon Bible had been taken from it, or
    was the same with slight alterations. I have frequently answered
    questions which have been asked me by different persons regarding
    "The Manuscript Found," but until now have never made a statement
    at length for publication.

    (Signed) M. S. McKENSTRY.

    Sworn and subscribed to before me this 3rd day of April, A. D.
    1880, at the city of Washington, D. C. CHARLES WALTER, Notary

The items to be noted in this affidavit are: First: That Mrs. McKenstry
was in her sixth year (i. e., five years old) in 1812, the year that
the Spaulding family left Conneaut, Ohio, for Pennsylvania. Four years
later, in 1816, her father died, so that she was in her tenth year
when that event took place, hence all her recollections concerning the
matter were those of a child between the ages of five and nine years.
When it is remembered how the half recollections of childhood blend
in with, and are modified by--or half made up--of things that one
hears about such days, no very great importance can be attached to the
statements she makes from personal knowledge of what "Manuscript Found"

Second: When about eleven years of age, when living at her uncle's in
Onondaga Valley, New York, (to which place she had removed with her
mother) she finds in an old trunk the writings of her father, and among
them a manucript about an inch thick, closely written, and entitled
"Manuscript Found." She did not read it, but had it in her hands many
times, and saw the names she claims to have heard at Conneaut.

Third: The visit of Hurlburt many years later, 1834, to herself and
mother then residing at Monson, Massachusetts, who presented a letter
from her uncle, W. H. Sabine, in which he requested Mrs. Davison
(formerly wife of Spaulding, it will be remembered) to loan the
manuscript of Spaulding's to Hurlburt for the purpose of "uprooting

Fourth: That Mrs. Davison gave an order to Hurlburt on Mr. Jerome Clark
of Hartwicks, New York, with whom she had left the trunk containing the

Fifth: That Hurlburt obtained "Manuscript Found" upon this order, and
that Mrs. Davison could never afterwards obtain any information from
him concerning it.

The interest created by Mrs. Dickenson's article in Scribner's, lead to
her making a more ambitious effort, and in 1885 she published a book
of some 275 pages under the title, "New Light on Mormonism," (which by
the way, is a sad misnomer, since it is but a rehash of all the stale,
Anti-Mormon stories in existence) which failed of making any great stir
in the world, just as all Anti-Mormon books up to date, by the way,
have failed.

The last phase in the development of the Spaulding theory is a
denouement; namely, the discovery and publication of Spaulding's
"Manucript Found," which determines forever the fact that it was not
the source whence the Book of Mormon was derived.

In 1839 or 1840, a Mr. L. L. Rice purchased the "Painesville
Telegraph," a newspaper, of Mr. E. D. Howe, the publisher of "Mormonism
Unveiled." The transfer of the printing department, types, press, etc.,
was accompanied with a large collection of books and manuscripts, and
undoubtedly the Spaulding manuscript, which Hurlburt had delivered to
Howe, was with the rest. Some years afterwards, Mr. Rice closed up his
business affairs in Painesville and finally made his home in Honolulu,
Sandwich Islands, taking with him his books, papers, etc. In 1884 Mr.
James H. Fairchild, President of Oberlin College, Ohio, visited Mr.
Rice, and suggested that the latter look through his numerous papers
for the purpose of finding among them anti-slavery documents (slavery
being a subject in which Mr. Rice had been much interested when living
in Ohio) that might be of value. Mr. Rice accepted the suggestions and,
in his search discovered a package marked in pencil on the outside
"Manuscript Story, Conneaut Creek;" and on the last page of the
manuscript the following inscription:

    The Writings of Solomon Spaulding Proved by Aaron Wright, Oliver
    Smith, John Miller and Others, the Testimonies of the Above
    Gentlemen are Now in My Possession.


This document proved to be the long lost romance of Solomon Spaulding.
President Fairchild gave the following account of the document and its
discovery in the January number, 1885, of the "Bibliotheca Sacra,"
published at Oberlin, Ohio:

    The theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon in the traditional
    manuscript of Solomon Spaulding will probably have to be
    relinquished. That manuscript is doubtless now in the possession
    of Mr. L. L. Rice, of Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, formerly an
    anti-slavery editor in Ohio, and for many years state printer at
    Columbus. During a recent visit to Honolulu, I suggested to Mr.
    Rice that he might have valuable anti-slavery documents in his
    possession which he would be willing to contribute to the rich
    collection already in the Oberlin College library. In pursuance of
    this suggestion Mr. Rice began looking over his old pamphlets and
    papers, and at length came upon an old, worn, and faded manuscript
    of about one hundred and seventy-five pages, small quarto,
    purporting to be a history of the migrations and conflicts of the
    ancient Indian tribes which occupied the territory now belonging
    to the states of New York, Ohio, and Kentucky. On the last page of
    this manuscript is a certificate and signature giving the names of
    several persons known to the signer, who have assured him that,
    to their personal knowledge, the manuscript was the writing of
    Solomon Spaulding. Mr. Rice has no recollection how or when this
    manuscript came into his possession. It was enveloped in a coarse
    piece of wrapping paper and endorsed in Mr. Rice's handwriting, "A
    Manuscript Story."

    There seems to be no reason to doubt that this is the long-lost
    story. Mr. Rice himself and others compared it with the Book of
    Mormon and could detect no resemblance between the two, in general
    or in detail. There seems to be no name or incident common to the
    two. The solemn style of the Book of Mormon, in imitation of the
    English scriptures, does not appear in the manuscript. The only
    resemblance is the fact that both profess to set forth the history
    of lost tribes. Some other explanation of the origin of the Book of
    Mormon must be found if any explanation is required.


The means now of ascertaining whether the Book of Mormon came from
Spaulding's manuscript was completed. A _verbatim et literatim_
transcript was obtained from Mr. L. L. Rice by President Joseph F.
Smith, who in 1884 and 1885 was residing in the Sandwich Islands.
This, in 1886, was published by the "Deseret News" exactly according
to the transcript, with all its errors of grammar and orthography, as
also with all the alterations, erasures, etc., made by its author,
indicated. After a careful examination of it, I think everybody will
come to the same conclusion that President Fairchild did: namely, that
there is "no resemblance between the two, in general or in detail.
There seems to be no name or incident common to the two--a fact that
completely explodes the theory that Spaulding's manuscript was the
origin of the Book of Mormon. Mr. Rice is of the same opinion as
President Fairchild, though more emphatic in the expression of it. He

    I should as soon think the Book of Revelation was written by the
    author of "Don Quixote," as that the writer of this manuscript was
    the author of the Book of Mormon.

Then in a postscript to the letter from which the above is a quotation,
he says:

    Upon reflection, since writing the foregoing, I am of the opinion
    that no one who reads this manuscript will give credit to the story
    that Solomon Spaulding was in any wise the author of the Book of
    Mormon. It is unlikely that any one who wrote so elaborate a work
    as the Mormon Bible would spend his time in getting up so shallow
    a story as this, which at best is but a feeble imitation of the
    other. Finally I am more than half convinced that this is his only
    writing of the sort, and that any pretense that Spaulding was in
    any sense the author of the other is a sheer fabrication. It was
    easy for anybody who may have seen this, or heard anything of its
    contents, to get up the story that they were identical.

Subsequently and in another letter he said:

    My opinion is, from all I have seen and learned, that this is the
    only writing of Spaulding, and there is no foundation for the
    statement of Deming and others that Spaulding made another story,
    more elaborate, of which several copies were written, one of which
    Rigdon stole from a printing office in Pittsburg, etc. [19]

Mr. Rice finally deposited the original Spaulding manuscript with the
Oberlin College, where it now lies secure for the inspection of the
curious, and a standing refutation to the extravagant claims that have
been made respecting the part it played in the origin of the Book of

Let us now review the course of those who originated this Spaulding
theory, and foister it upon the world. It was evidently conceived
by "Doctor" Philastus Hurlburt, the enemy of the Prophet Joseph and
of Mormonism. He had heard of Spaulding's writings in Pennsylvania,
also at Conneaut, Ohio, and in his hatred of Mormonism determined to
show some connection between the writings of Spaulding and the Book
of Mormon, in the hope of destroying faith in the divine origin of
the latter. He appealed to other enemies of the Prophet, and with
their financial assistance started out to collect affidavits and
statements that would prove his theory. Hurlburt, under Mrs. Davison's
order, as already seen, obtained Spaulding's story "The Manuscript
Found," undoubtedly the identical story which Spaulding had read to
his neighbors on Conneaut Creek. This is proved by the fact that the
document which Hurlburt turned over to Howe [20] corresponds with every
description that is given concerning the size and character of the

Mrs. Davison, in her conversation with Jesse Haven, declares that
the manuscript would be "about one-third as large as the Book of
Mormon" [21] (that is, would produce about one-third of the printed
matter in that book.)

Mrs. McKinstry, in describing "Manuscript Found" which she had in
her hands many times, says that the manuscript was "about one inch
thick, and closely written." This agrees closely with the statement
of Mrs. Davison on the subject. Mr. Howe, in his book, declares that
the "Manuscript Found" in Mrs. Spaulding Davison's trunk was "in
Spaulding's hand writing, containing about one quire of paper." [22]

All witnesses who came in contact with this manuscript story declare
that the title of it was "The Manuscript Found;" or "Manuscript Found."
This is the statement of nearly all the witnesses on Conneaut Creek,
whose testimony appears in Howe's "Mormonism," and that it contained
the names of "Nephi," "Lehi," "Mormon," "Lamanites," etc., and was
based on the theory that the American Indians were the "Lost tribes
of Israel." But when Hurlburt returned to Conneaut with this precious
"Manuscript Found," according to Howe's own statement, it was not at
all what it had been represented to be. Howe says of the manuscript:

    This is a romance purporting to have been translated from the
    Latin found on 24 rolls of parchment in a cave on the banks of
    Conneaut Creek, but written in modern style, and giving a fabulous
    account of a ship's being driven upon the American coast while
    proceeding from Rome to Britain a short time previous to the
    Christian era; this country then being inhabited by the Indians.
    This old manuscript has been shown to several of the foregoing
    witnesses, [23] who recognize it as Spaulding's.

The foregoing accurately describes the "Manuscript Found," since
obtained of Mr. L. L. Rice and published; and by both its title and
its size is identified to be the manuscript read by Spaulding to his

This manuscript must have been a very great disappointment to the
conspirators against the Book of Mormon. They had staked their all on
the fact of Spaulding's "Manuscript Found" being the foundation matter
of the Book of Mormon, but when found it proved to be so dissimilar
that they could not, with any face, undertake to maintain that this
manuscript was the source whence the Book of Mormon was derived. What
must be done to meet this dilemma? That those who had gone this far in
opposing the work of God would repent of their folly, and admit their
defeat would be too much to expect. No; instead of doing that they
resorted to the following subterfuge. I quote Howe:

    This manuscript has been shown to several of the foregoing
    witnesses who recognize it as Spaulding's, he having told them that
    he had altered his first plan of writing, by going farther back
    with dates, and writing in the old scripture style, in order that
    it might appear more ancient. They say that it bears no resemblance
    to the "Manuscript Found." [24]

Two things, in this statement, are extremely unfortunate for the
reputation of Mr. Howe, and those who have been beguiled into accepting
the theory of his book respecting the origin of the Book of Mormon:

First: The fact that in none of the statements of the witnesses who
heard Mr. Spaulding read his manuscript is there any account of his
having made two drafts of his story, one which he found too modern
to suit the antiquities of America, and written in modern style; and
the other going farther back in time and written in the old scripture
style, in order to make it appear more ancient. All this seems to have
been an after thought, a subterfuge, when it was learned that "The
Manuscript Found" did not warrant the theory that it was the foundation
of the Book of Mormon. The things it is here claimed were said by these
Conneaut witnesses concerning a second Spaulding Manuscript on American
antiquities, are not said _by_ them, but _for_ them by Mr. Howe.

Second: That Mr. Howe himself wickedly conceals the fact that this
old Roman story of Spaulding's was labeled "Manuscript Found;" and in
addition to concealing that fact declares that the witnesses say "that
it bears no resemblance to the "Manuscript Found," when, as a matter of
fact, this Roman story itself was the "Manuscript Found." Comment is
unnecessary; a bare statement of the facts expose the villainy of these
conspirators. [25]

Relative to the manner in which it is supposed the Spaulding manuscript
came into the hands of Joseph Smith, the theories differ. Howe supposes
that Lambdin, alleged partner of Patterson in the printing business at
Pittsburg, placed in the hands of Sidney Rigdon the "Manuscript Found,"
to be "embellished, altered, and added to as he might think expedient"
to transform it into what is now the Book of Mormon. [26] When Howe put
forth this theory, Lambdin had been dead some eight years. [27]

Query: Did Howe select this dead man as the medium through which the
Spaulding manuscript reached the hands of Sidney Rigdon, and thence
to Joseph Smith, for the reason that the dead man could not arise to
contradict it? We shall see that Patterson contradicted it when that
gentleman was appealed to in order to confirm his connection with
Sidney Rigdon.

The Rev. John Storrs, in the bogus signed statement he put forth as
coming from Mrs. Davison, represents her as saying that Rigdon became
acquainted with Spaulding's manuscript "and copied it," and that this
was a "matter of notoriety and interest to all connected with the
printing establishment." According to this "Davison Statement," the
manuscript was returned to Mr. Spaulding before he left Pittsburg
for Amity (where he died), and that the manuscript after this was
"carefully preserved" by Mrs. Spaulding, until delivered to Hurlburt,
in 1834.

Rev. Clark Braden, a Campbellite minister, in a protracted debate on
the Book of Mormon in Kirtland, 1884, declares that Sidney Rigdon stole
the Spaulding manuscript and that Mrs. (Spaulding) Davison--he should
have said rather the Rev. John Storrs, the real author of the "Davison
Statement"--was mistaken in saying that Rigdon "copied it" and returned
the original to Mr. Spaulding. [28]

Mrs. McKenstry's affidavit on the subject, published in Scribner's for
August, 1880, says he (Solomon Spaulding) loaned the manuscript to Mr.
Patterson; that he read it and returned it to its author, with the
suggestion that he "polish it up and finish it," and that he might make
money out of it; but when Mr. Patterson was appealed to for information
on the subject he said he had "no recollection of any such manuscript
being brought there (i. e., to his establishment in Pittsburg) for
publication." [29]

Mrs. Ellen E. Dickinson, grand-niece of Solomon Spaulding and the
author of "New Light on Mormonism," holds that the Spaulding manuscript
remained safely in the hands of the family until turned over to
Hurlburt. At this point she thinks several things may have befallen
the manuscript. One, that Hurlburt "sold the manuscript to the Mormons
for a sum of money which he used in purchasing a farm near Gibonsburg,
Ohio, where he now [1880] resides; and that the Mormons burned the
manuscript at Conneaut." Another, that "Hurlburt sold it with a sworn
agreement that it should not be given to the world until after his
death." Then she concludes:

    There are circumstances which support both theories; but the
    author's opinion, after a careful study of the matter, is, that
    Hurlburt made a copy of the original manuscript, which he sold to
    E. D. Howe, of Painsville, to use in writing the book "Mormonism
    Unveiled," and sold the original to the Mormons, who destroyed it.
    The life of Hurlburt since his return from his errand of duplicity
    to Munson shows conclusively that he wishes to hide himself from
    the world, and that he is burdened with a secret which he does not
    intend shall come to light through any act or revelation of his
    own. [30] * * * Beyond a shadow of doubt Hurlburt, after getting
    the genuine Spaulding romance at Munson, destroyed it or saw it
    destroyed by the Mormons at Conneaut, in 1834, after his being paid
    for his share of this transaction. [31]

This theory Mrs. Davison maintains throughout her book with something
more than a half hysterical style meant to be very sensational.

Thus these originators and promulgators of the Spaulding theory,
having started with conjecture and falsehood, go on varying, changing,
and patching up their story until they are involved in innumerable
inconsistencies and contradictions, which constantly makes more
apparent the absurdity of this attempt to construct a counter theory
for the origin of the Book of Mormon to that given by Joseph Smith.
The theory, however, fails by dint of its own inconsistencies, and
by the discovery and publication of the manuscript with which the
theory started; and that in another way, and in addition to the fact
that there is no incident, or name, or set of ideas, common to the
two productions. The publication of the "Manuscript Found" not only
demonstrates that this particular manuscript was not the foundation
of the Book of Mormon, but it demonstrates, also, that no other
writings of Solomon Spaulding's could possibly be the Book of Mormon.
Spaulding's manuscript, as published, makes a pamphlet of some 112
pages, of about 350 words to the page, enough matter to give a clear
idea of his literary style. I am sure that no person, having any
literary judgment will think it possible for the author of "Manuscript
Found" to be the author of the Book of Mormon. Composition in writers
becomes individualized as distinctly as the looks, or appearance, or
character, of separate individuals; and they can no more write in
several styles than individuals can impersonate different characters.
True, by special efforts this latter may be done to a limited extent
by a change of tone, costume and the like, but underneath these
impersonations is to be seen the real individual; and so with authors.
One may sometimes affect a light, and sometimes a serious vein, in
prose and poetry. He may imitate a solemn scriptural style or the
diction of some Greek or Roman author, but underneath it all will be
seen the individuality of the writer from which he cannot separate
himself any more than he can separate himself from his true form,
features, or character. Since we have in this "Manuscript Found" enough
of Mr. Spaulding's style to determine its nature, if this manuscript of
his was used either as the foundation or the complete work of the Book
of Mormon, we should be able to detect Spauldingisms in it; identity
of style would be apparent; but these things are entirely absent from
every page of the Book of Mormon. Mr. Rice does not overstate the
matter when he says: "I should as soon think the Book of Revelation
was written by the author of "Don Quixote," as that the writer of this
manuscript was the author of the Book of Mormon." And again, he is
right when he says: "It is unlikely that any one who wrote so elaborate
a work as the Mormon Bible would spend his time in getting up so
shallow a story as this"--the Spaulding Story.

Another point at which the Spaulding theory goes to pieces is in the
utter inability of its advocates to bring together the parties to
the conspiracy in which the Book of Mormon is supposed to have had
its origin. They fail even to bring Joseph Smith in contact with the
Spaulding manuscript; they also fail to connect Sidney Rigdon with
the manuscript; they fail to bring together Joseph Smith and Sidney
Rigdon, previous to the publication of the Book of Mormon. In all these
things, vital to the maintenance of their theory, they fail. Joseph
Smith and Sidney Rigdon, until after the publication of the Book of
Mormon, are from 200 to 300 miles apart, with no means of communication
or of collaboration, which would be necessary if the Spaulding theory
were correct. Of the necessary extent and greatness of this conspiracy,
Elder George Reynolds justly remarks:

    Whole families must have been engaged in it. Men of all ages and
    various conditions in life, and living in widely separate portions
    of the country must have been connected with it. First, we must
    include in the catalogue of conspirators the whole of the Smith
    family, then the Whitmers, Martin Harris and Oliver Cowdery;
    further, to carry out this absurd idea, Sidney Rigdon and Parley
    P. Pratt must have been their active fellow-conspirators in
    arranging, carrying out and consummating their iniquitous fraud.
    To do this they must have traveled thousands of miles and spent
    months, perhaps years, to accomplish--what? That is the unsolved
    problem. Was it for the purpose of duping the world? They, at any
    rate the great majority of them, were of all men most unlikely to
    be engaged in such a folly. Their habits, surroundings, station
    in life, youth and inexperience all forbid such a thought. What
    could they gain, in any light that could be then presented to
    their minds, by palming such a deception upon the world? This is
    another unanswerable question. Then comes the staggering fact,
    if the book be a falsity, that all these families, all these
    diverse characters, in all the trouble, perplexity, persecution
    and suffering through which they passed, never wavered in their
    testimony, never changed their statements, never "went back" on
    their original declarations, but continued unto death, and they
    have all passed away (save a very few), proclaiming that the Book
    of Mormon was a divine revelation, and that its record was true.
    Was there ever such an exhibition in the history of the world of
    such continued, such unabating, such undeviating falsehood if
    falsehood it was? We cannot find a place in the annals of their
    lives where they wavered, and what makes the matter more remarkable
    is that it can be said of most of them, as is elsewhere said of
    the three witnesses, they became offended with the Prophet Joseph,
    and a number of them openly rebelled against him; but they never
    retracted one word with regard to the genuineness of Mormon's
    inspired record. Whether they were friends or foes to Joseph,
    whether they regarded him as God's continued mouthpiece or as a
    fallen Prophet, they still persisted in their statements with
    regard to the book and the veracity of their earlier testimonies.
    How can we possibly, with our knowledge of human nature, make
    this undeviating, unchanging, unwavering course, continuing
    over fifty years consistent with a deliberate, premeditated and
    cunningly-devised and executed fraud! [32]


_The Sidney Rigdon Theory_.

It will be seen, by those who have followed us through the treatise on
the Spaulding Theory, that Sidney Rigdon is considered a factor in that
supposed scheme. It is generally thought that it was he who supplied
the religious matter of the book, and who determined the parts of the
Hebrew scripture that should be interwoven in its alleged historical
parts. Such prominence, in fact, is given to Sidney Rigdon in bringing
forth the Book of Mormon that I decided to consider his connection with
it under this separate heading.

Mr. Sidney Rigdon always, and most emphatically, denied the story of
his connection with Patterson and his printing establishment. In the
January number (1836) of the "Latter-day Saints Messenger and Advocate"
he denounces Howe's book and those who advocated it. Referring to Mr.
Scott, Mr. Campbell and other professed ministers of the gospel, he

    In order to avoid investigation this brotherhood will condescend
    to mean, low subterfuges, to which a noble-minded man would never
    condescend; no, he would suffer martyrdom first. Witness Mr.
    Campbell's recommendation of Howe's book, while he knows, as well
    as every person who reads it, that it is a batch of falsehoods.

Later, in a letter to Messrs. Bartlett and Sullivan, written from
Commerce (afterwards Nauvoo), May 27, 1839, in a communication called
forth by the publication of the bogus statement purporting to come from
Mrs. Davison and published by the Rev. John Storrs, Elder Rigdon said:

    Commerce, May 27, 1839. Messrs. Bartlett and Sullivan:--In your
    paper of the 18th instant, I see a letter signed my somebody
    calling herself Matilda Davison, pretending to give the origin of
    Mormonism, as she is pleased to call it, by relating a moonshine
    story about a certain Solomon Spaulding, a creature with the
    knowledge of whose earthly existence I am entirely indebted to this
    production; for, surely, until Dr. Philastus Hurlburt informed
    me that such a being lived, at some former period, I had not the
    most distant knowledge of his existence; and all I know about his
    character is the opinion I form from what is attributed to his wife
    in obtruding my name upon the public in the manner in which she is
    said to have done, by trying to make the public believe that I had
    knowledge of the ignorant, and, according to her own testimony, the
    lying scribblings of her deceased husband; for if her testimony is
    to be credited, her pious husband, in his lifetime, wrote a bundle
    of lies for the righteous purpose of getting money. How many lies
    he had told for the same purpose, while he was preaching, she has
    not so kindly informed us; but we are at liberty to draw our own
    conclusions, for he that would write lies to get money, would also
    preach lies for the same object. This being the only information
    which I have, or ever had, of the said Rev. Solomon Spaulding, I,
    of necessity, have but a very light opinion of him as a gentleman,
    a scholar, or a man of piety, for had he been either, he certainly
    would have taught his pious wife not to lie, nor unite herself with
    adulterers, liars, and the basest of mankind.

    It is only necessary to say, in relation to the whole story about
    Spaulding's writings being in the hands of Mr. Patterson, who was
    in Pittsburg, and who is said to have kept a printing office, and
    my saying that I was concerned in the said office, etc., is the
    most base of lies, without even a shadow of truth. There was no man
    by the name of Patterson, during my residence at Pittsburg, who had
    a printing office; what might have been before I lived there I know
    not. Mr. Robert Patterson, I was told, had owned a printing office
    before I lived in that city, but had been unfortunate in business,
    and failed before my residence there. This Mr. Patterson, who was a
    Presbyterian preacher, I had a very slight acquaintance with during
    my residence in Pittsburg. He was then acting under an agency, in
    the book and stationery business, and was the owner of no property
    of any kind, printing office or anything else, during the time I
    resided in the city. [33]

One can but regret the tone and coarseness of this letter of Sidney
Rigdon's, but it cannot be denied but that it is a very emphatic
contradiction of the charge that he was connected with the Spaulding
manuscript theory of the Book of Mormon's origin, and it is very
natural that a man of the nervous, irritable temperament of Sidney
Rigdon would be very much vexed at connecting him with such a theory.

On the matter of Sidney Rigdon not being connected with the origin
of the Book of Mormon we have also the statement of Oliver Cowdery,
made on his return to the Church at Kanesville (now Council Bluffs),
in October, 1848, a statement that was made in the presence of 2,000
Saints. In the course of his remarks, Oliver Cowdery then said:

    I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few
    pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph Smith, as he
    translated it by the gift and power of God, by means of the Urim
    and Thummim, or, as it is called by that book, "Holy Interpreters."
    I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands the gold plates
    from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled
    with my hands the "holy interpreters." That book is true. Sidney
    Rigdon did not write it. Mr. Spaulding did not write it. I wrote it
    myself as it fell from the lips of the Prophet. [34]

Parley P. Pratt, who, with Oliver Cowdery, was the first to present the
Book of Mormon to Sidney Rigdon some six months after its publication,
is also on record as denying the story of Sidney Rigdon's connection
with the origin of the Book of Mormon. When the "Davison Statement"
was copied from the "Boston Recorder" into the "New York Era," Elder
Pratt promptly denied the falsehood. The "Era" published the "Davison
Statement" on the 20th, and in its issue of the 27th Elder Pratt
published a somewhat exhaustive treatise in which the following occurs:

    The piece in your paper states that "Sidney Rigdon was connected
    in the printing office of Mr. Patterson" (in Pittsburg), and that
    this is a fact well known in that region, and as Rigdon himself
    has frequently stated. Here he had ample opportunity to become
    acquainted with Mr. Spaulding's manuscript (romance) and to copy
    it if he chose. This statement is utterly and entirely false. Mr.
    Rigdon was never connected with the said printing establishment,
    either directly or indirectly, and we defy the world to bring proof
    of any such connection. * * The statement that Sidney Rigdon is one
    of the founders of the said religious sect is also incorrect.

    The sect was founded in the state of New York, while Mr. Rigdon
    resided in Ohio, several hundred miles distant. Mr. Rigdon embraced
    the doctrine through my instrumentality. I first presented the Book
    of Mormon to him. I stood upon the bank of the stream while he
    was baptized, and assisted to officiate in his ordination, and I
    myself was unacquainted with the system until some months after its
    organization, which was on the 6th of April, 1830, and I embraced
    it in September following.

Again, in 1840, in a work entitled "Late Persecutions of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints," referring to the persecutions in
Missouri, in the course of which he also gave an account of the rise
and progress of the doctrine of the Church, Elder Pratt says, relative
to this Spaulding story:

    There is one story, however, which I will notice, because some
    religious journals have given some credit to it. It is the story
    of Solomon Spaulding writing a romance of the ancient inhabitants
    of America which is said to be converted by Mr. Sidney Rigdon into
    the Book of Mormon. This is another base fabrication got up by the
    devil and his servants to deceive the world. Mr. Sidney Rigdon
    never saw the Book of Mormon until it had been published more than
    six months; it was then presented to him by the author of this
    history. [35]

From another source there is also an emphatic denial of Sidney Rigdon's
connection with the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. This is the
statement of Mr. Rigdon's son, John W. Rigdon. This gentleman wrote
a somewhat extended biography of his father, Sidney Rigdon, which he
placed in its manuscript form in the Church Historian's office, at
Salt Lake City, where it is now on file. Mr. John W. Rigdon's account
of his father's connection with the Book of Mormon agrees with the
statement of Elder Pratt; and then, near the close of his narrative,
he relates his own experience in connection with Mormonism, and his
attempt to learn the truth from his father respecting the latter's
early connection with the Book of Mormon. John W. Rigdon tells of his
own visit to Utah, in 1863, where he spent the winter among the Mormon
people. He was not favorably impressed with their religious life, and
came to the conclusion that the Book of Mormon itself was a fraud. He
determined in his own heart that if ever he returned home and found
his father, Sidney Rigdon, alive, he would try and find out what he
knew of the origin of the Book of Mormon. "Although," he adds, "he had
never told but one story about it, and that was that Parley P. Pratt
and Oliver Cowdery presented him with a bound volume of that book in
the year 1830, while he (Sidney Rigdon) was preaching Campbellism
at Mentor, Ohio." What John W. Rigdon claims to have seen in Utah,
however, together with the fact that Sidney Rigdon had been charged
with writing the Book of Mormon, made him suspicious; and he remarks:

    I concluded I would make an investigation for my own satisfaction
    and find out, if I could, if he had all these years been deceiving
    his family and the world, by telling that which was not true,
    and I was in earnest about it. If Sidney Rigdon, my father, had
    thrown his life away by telling a falsehood and bringing sorrow and
    disgrace upon his family, I wanted to know it and was determined
    to find out the facts, no matter what the consequences might be. I
    reached home in the fall of 1865, found my father in good health
    and (he) was very much pleased to see me. As he had not heard
    anything from me for some time, he was afraid that I had been
    killed by the Indians. Shortly after I had arrived home, I went to
    my father's room; he was there and alone, and now was the time for
    me to commence my inquiries in regard to the origin of the Book
    of Mormon, and as to the truth of the Mormon religion. I told him
    what I had seen at Salt Lake City, and I said to him that what I
    had seen at Salt Lake had not impressed me very favorably toward
    the Mormon Church, "and as to the origin of the Book of Mormon I
    had some doubts." "You have been charged with writing that book
    and giving it to Joseph Smith to introduce to the world. You have
    always told me one story; that you never saw the book until it was
    presented to you by Parley P. Pratt and Oliver Cowdery; and all you
    ever knew of the origin of that book was what they told you and
    what Joseph Smith and the witnesses who claimed to have seen the
    plates had told you. Is this true? If so, all right; if it is not,
    you owe it to me and to your family to tell it. You are an old man
    and you will soon pass away, and I wish to know if Joseph Smith, in
    your intimacy with him for fourteen years, has not said something
    to you that led you to believe he obtained that book in some other
    way than what he had told you. Give me all you know about it, that
    I may know the truth." 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 that book 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 that
    book 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 the one
    story, and that was that he found it engraved upon gold plates in
    a hill near Palmyra, New York, and that an angel had appeared to
    him and directed him where to find it; and I have never, to you or
    to any one else, told but the one story, and that I now repeat to
    you." I believed him, and now believe he told me the truth. He also
    said to me after that that Mormonism was true; that Joseph Smith
    was a Prophet, and this world would find it out some day. [36]

In addition to these solemn denials of Sidney Rigdon's connection with
this Spaulding theory, we have another means of testing whether or
not Sidney Rigdon was the author of the Book of Mormon. That test is
the one already referred to when considering the difference of style
between Spaulding's manuscript story, and the Book of Mormon. We have
enough of Sidney Rigdon's writings before us to determine his literary
style; namely, in the Historian's office we have in manuscript his
description of the land of Zion, Jackson County, which he was commanded
of the Lord to write. We have a number of his communications published
in the "Evening and Morning Star," and also the "Messenger and
Advocate." In these two publications also there are thirteen articles
on the subject of the "Millennium" from his pen, and after careful
comparison of his style with that of the Book of Mormon, I do not
hesitate to say that Sidney Rigdon, not only never did, but never could
have written the Book of Mormon. There are no phrases or conceptions
in the Book of Mormon that are Sidney Rigdon's. There is nothing in
common between his style and that of the Book of Mormon. There can be
no doubt about it; Sidney Rigdon as the author of the Book of Mormon is


_The "Joachim" fragment of the Spaulding-Rigdon Theory_.

It was reserved for William Linn, author of the "Story of the
Mormons," [37] a pretentious work of nearly 650 pages, to go "a far
way" for an additional item which, in the full pride of an author who
has made a new discovery, he adds to the Spaulding-Rigdon theory of
the Book of Mormon's origin. This new item I have called the "Joachim
Fragment of the Spaulding-Rigdon Theory." Mr. Linn, with evident pride,
makes this mention of it in the preface of his book: "The probable
service of Joachim's 'Everlasting Gospel,' as suggesting the story of
the revelation of the plates, has been hitherto overlooked." [38] In the
body of his work he thus sets forth his idea of the part played by the
"Everlasting Gospel," sometimes called by other writers, "The Eternal
Gospel," and in the thirteenth century, when it was supposed to be in
circulation among the Franciscan order of monks, it is spoken of as
"The Book of Joachim."

    That the idea of the revelation (i. e., of the existence of the
    Book of Mormon) as described by Smith in his autobiography was
    not original is shown by the fact that a similar divine message,
    engraved on plates, was announced to have been received from an
    angel nearly six hundred years before the alleged visit of an angel
    to Smith. These original plates were described as a copper, and
    the recipient was a monk named Cyril, from whom their contents
    passed into the possession of the Abbot Joachim, whose "Everlasting
    Gospel," founded thereon, was offered to the church as supplanting
    the New Testament, just as the New Testament had supplanted the
    Old, and caused so serious a schism that Pope Alexander IV took the
    severest measures against it. [39]

This description of the origin of Joachim's "Everlasting Gospel"
rests upon the respectable authority of Draper, in his "Intellectual
Development of Europe." [40]

Linn's argument is to the effect that this origin of the "Everlasting
Gospel" suggested the origin of the Book of Mormon because of the
resemblance between the celestial announcement of both, and also
because that both, according to his idea of them, were declared to
have the same purport--each was to be "a forerunner of the end of the
world." He also urges the frequent use of the phrase, "Everlasting
Gospel," in the discourses of the early Elders of the Church as
evidence that there was some connection between these two things,
the Book of Mormon and "The Book of Joachim." He further holds that
Sidney Rigdon, in the course of his ecclesiastical reading would come
in contact with the story of Joachim's "Everlasting Gospel;" that it
would be just such a story as would be attractive to one of Sidney
Rigdon's temperament. Linn throughout his work assumes a connection
and collaboration between Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, and claims
that the latter suggested the story of the "Book of Joachim," as the
ground-work of Joseph Smith's account of the origin of the Book of
Mormon. Our author thinks that Rigdon may even have found sufficient
matter in relation to Joachim's "Everlasting Gospel," in Mosheim's
"Ecclesiastical History," to suggest the account he induced Joseph
Smith to give of the origin of the Book of Mormon, and makes the
following quotation from Mosheim in proof of his contention:

    About the commencement of this [the thirteenth] century there were
    handed about in Italy several pretended prophecies of the famous
    Joachim, Abbot of Sora, in Calabria, whom the multitude revered
    as a person divinely inspired, and equal to the most illustrious
    prophets of ancient times. The greatest part of these predictions
    were contained in a certain book entitled, "The Everlasting
    Gospel," and which was also commonly called the Book of Joachim.
    This Joachim, whether a real or fictitious person we shall not
    pretend to determine, among many other future events, foretold the
    destruction of the Church of Rome, whose corruptions he censured
    with the greatest severity, and the promulgation of a new and more
    perfect gospel in the age of the Holy Ghost, by the set of poor and
    austere ministers, whom God was to raise up and employ for that

It is to be observed of this passage, as indeed of all that is said by
Mosheim upon the subject, that there is no account here of an angel
revealing the existence of the Book of Joachim to Cyril, or to any one
else, which is the chief item of resemblance between Joseph Smith's
story of the origin of the Book of Mormon and the alleged origin of
"The Everlasting Gospel," as related by Draper and Linn. Indeed, in the
closing lines of the very paragraph from Mosheim which Linn quotes as
being the possible source of Sidney Rigdon's knowledge of the "Book of
Joachim," it is stated that the Franciscans who accepted Joachim's book
maintained that Saint Francis, the founder of their Order, had "spoken
to mankind the true gospel, and that he was the angel whom Saint John
saw flying in the midst of heaven;" which is quite a different account
of this matter than that given by Draper. Whether or not Sidney Rigdon
had access to the same source of information as Draper had, is, of
course, not known; but certainly Draper did not obtain the account of
the angel appearing to Cyril from Mosheim. As a matter of fact, there
is much confusion and uncertainty among authorities respecting the
origin of this "Everlasting Gospel," and some question whether such a
book was ever put forth by Joachim. The work used at the time it was
current in the thirteenth century was very often confounded with an
introduction to the so-called "Everlasting Gospel," written, as Draper
says, by John of Parma; and as others say by Gerhard, a Franciscan
friar. The celebrated Dr. Augustus Neander, in his "General History of
the Christian Religion and Church," holds to this same theory. He says:

    A great sensation was now created by a commentary on the "eternal
    gospel," which after the middle of the thirteenth century the
    Franciscan Gerhard, who, by his zeal for Joachim's doctrines,
    involved himself in many persecutions and incurred an eighteen
    years' imprisonment, published under the title of "Introduction
    to the Eternal Gospel." Many vague notions were entertained about
    the "eternal gospel" of the Franciscans, arising from superficial
    views, or a superficial understanding of Joachim's writings, and
    the offspring of mere rumor of the heresy-hunting spirit. Men spoke
    of the "eternal gospel" as of a book composed under this title,
    and circulated among the Franciscans. Occasionally, also, this
    "eternal gospel" was confounded perhaps with the above-mentioned
    "Introduction." In reality, there was no book existing under this
    title of the "Eternal Gospel;" but all that is said about it
    relates simply to the writings of Joachim. * * * The whole matter
    of this work also seems to have consisted in an explanation of the
    fundamental ideas of the Abbot Joachim, and in the application of
    them to the genuine Franciscan order. [41]

This exhibits much confusion and uncertainty concerning the story of
Joachim and his book. Of course, it may be argued that this story of
the Book of Joachim, as told by Draper and repeated by Linn, would
furnish equally well the suggestion of the origin of the Book of
Mormon, whether it was the statement of an historical fact or only the
wild invention of a fanatical Franciscan, but it would be incumbent
upon those who make such an argument to prove that Sidney Rigdon had
knowledge of such a story.

Another suggestion may be argued that would tend to break down the
probability of the origin of the "Everlasting Gospel" suggesting the
origin of the Book of Mormon; and that is: Had Sidney Rigdon or any
one else taken the story of the revelation of the Book of Joachim to
Cyril and from it invented the account of the coming forth of the Book
of Mormon, he would very likely have taken other ideas attributed to
this very worthy but over-zealous and weak-minded man of the thirteenth
century. As, for example, Linn himself declares that the "Everlasting
Gospel was offered to the Church as supplanting the New Testament,
just as the New Testament had supplanted the Old," etc., a theory that
would very likely have caught the fancy of such a man as Linn conceives
Rigdon to have been. Yet Mormonism is as far removed from any such
conception as this, as the east is from the west; for Mormonism gives
full force to the present authority of both the Old and New Testaments
as containing the word of God, and the Book of Mormon nowhere supplants
these existing scriptures. Neander presents a more elaborate view of
some of the theories of this same Joachim, and represents him as
teaching the following:

    The times of the Old Testament belong especially to God the
    Father; in it, God revealed himself as the Almighty, by signs
    and wonders; next, followed the times of the New Testament, in
    which God, as the Word, revealed himself in his wisdom, where
    the striving after a comprehensible knowledge of mysteries
    predominates; the last times belong to the Holy Spirit, when the
    first of love in contemplation will predominate. As the letter
    of the Old Testament answers to God the Father, the letter of
    the New Testament more especially to the Son, so the spiritual
    understanding, which proceeds from both, answers to the Holy
    Spirit. As all things were created by the Father through the Son;
    so in the Holy Spirit, as love, all were to find their completion.
    To the working of the Father--power, fear, faith, more especially
    correspond; to the working of the Son--humility, truth, and wisdom;
    to the working of the Holy Spirit--love, joy, and freedom. [42]

In like manner he takes up the Apostles Peter, James, and John as in
a way representing in the earth, respectively, the three periods in
the process of the development of the Church. I insist that if Sidney
Rigdon had become acquainted with that story of the "Everlasting
Gospel," as it is told by Draper, he would unquestionably also have
come to the knowledge of these theories of Joachim's; and if Sidney
Rigdon was the kind of character that Linn represents him to be, he
would unquestionably have taken up some of these vagaries and exploited
them, either in the Book of Mormon or in the subsequent development
of the Church and its system of doctrine. It is scarcely necessary to
say that none of these ideas of the thirteenth century man is to be
found in Mormonism, nor are any other of Joachim's ideas found in the
Latter-day dispensation of the Gospel. The mere matter of using the
phrase, "Everlasting Gospel," by the early Elders of the Church--and
for matter of that by the present ministry of the Church--in their
discourses and books, scarcely rises to dignity of a coincidence,
since we have the phrase suggested in the remarkable prophecy on the
restoration of the Gospel in the Revelations of St. John, [43] without
referring to any circumstance of the thirteenth century and the obscure
literature concerning the Book of Joachim.

This whole theory of the suggested origin of the Book of Mormon
from the story of the Book of Joachim, however ingenious it may be
regarded, breaks down as the Spaulding-Rigdon theory does, under the
absolute inability of all these speculators to show any connection,
or collaboration, between Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon previous to
the publication of the Book of Mormon. Their inventions fail; their
speculations amount to nothing. It is impossible to show any contact
between Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon before the Book of Mormon was
published, therefore, whatever opportunity Sidney Rigdon may have had
to become acquainted with the story of Joachim's "Everlasting Gospel,"
that knowledge could play no part whatever in the coming forth of the
Book of Mormon.


_Woodbridge Riley's Theory of the Origin of the Book of Mormon_.

This theory may be said, in a way, to be a reversion to that of
Alexander Campbell's; that is, a return to the theory that Joseph
Smith was the "author" of the Book of Mormon. Mr. Riley's book, of 446
pages, is a well written thesis on the "Founder of Mormonism." It was
published by Dodd, Mead & Company, 1902. It is a psychological study of
Joseph Smith the Prophet. The purpose of the work is set forth in the
author's preface, as follows:

    The aim of this work is to examine Joseph Smith's character and
    achievements from the standpoint of recent psychology. Sectarians
    and phrenologists, spiritualists and mesmerists have variously
    interpreted his more or less abnormal performances--it now remains
    for the psychologist to have a try at them.

The work also has an introductory preface by Professor George Trumbull
Ladd, of Yale University, in which Mr. Riley's essay is very highly
praised. Indeed the work was offered to the Philosophical Faculty of
Yale University as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, and
before this the matter of the essay had been utilized in 1898 for a
Master of Arts thesis, under the title of "Metaphysics of Mormonism,"
so that from these circumstances we may venture the remark that Mr.
Riley's book is of highly scientific character, at least in its
literary structure, and has already attracted some considerable notice
in the world.

To the Latter-day Saints it will be interesting, and of value at least
in this, that they may accept it as one of many manifestations that
the other theories accounting for the origin of the Book of Mormon are
regarded as inadequate, if not exploded, since the learned find it
necessary to set forth now a new theory, both for the origin of the
Book of Mormon, and the life work of the Prophet Joseph.

Mr. Riley's conclusions, after patient consideration of what he regards
as the elements entering into the composition of the Book of Mormon,
are thus stated:

    In spite of a continuous stream of conjectural literature, it is
    as yet impossible to pick out any special document as an original
    source of the Book of Mormon. In particular the commonly-accepted
    Spaulding theory is insoluble from external evidence and disproved
    by internal evidence. Joseph Smith's "Record of the Indians" is a
    product indigenous to the New York "Wilderness," and the authentic
    work of its "author and proprietor." Outwardly, it reflects the
    local color of Palmyra and Manchester, inwardly, its complexity
    of thought is a replica of Smith's muddled brain. This monument
    of misplaced energy was possible to the impressionable youth
    constituted and circumstanced as he was. [44]

As for the process by which the book was produced, our author conceives
it thus:

    It was in western New York that the son of an obscure farmer gazed
    in his magic crystal, automatically wrote "a transcription of gold
    plates," dictated the Book of Mormon, and after strange signs and
    wonders, started his communistic sect. [45]

Our author makes an extended pathological study of the prophet's
ancestry, and arrives at the conclusion that their mental peculiarities
and defects, culminate in epilepsy in Joseph Smith the Prophet. So
that we may say, roughly speaking, that Mr. Riley's explanation of
the origin of the Book of Mormon, and Mormonism, is that it has its
source in an epileptic, whose-hallucinations are honestly mistaken
for inspired visions, and who possesses partly conscious and partly
unconscious hypnotic power over others. And this theory is presented
seriously to one of the first institutions of learning in America as a
rational explanation of "Mormonism!"

Unfortunately for Mr. Riley's theory, however, another writer, an
authority in his chosen field of investigation, a writer of text books
for higher institutions of learning on this very subject, has spoken
with marked emphasis not only with reference to epilepsy in general and
the milder forms of its manifestation under the head of Paranoia, but
has spoken of it with special reference to Joseph Smith, and distinctly
separates him from such class of persons. Following are passages from
Mr. Dana's works upon the subject:

    A certain rather small per centage of epileptics become either
    demented or insane. True epilepsy is not compatible with
    extraordinary intellectual endowments. Caesar, Napoleon, Peter the
    Great and other geniuses may have had some symptomatic fits, but
    not idispathic [primary] epilepsy. [46]


    Paranoia is a chronic psychosis characterized by the development
    gradually and soon after maturity of systematized delusion,
    without other serious disturbances of the mind and without much
    tendency to dementia. * * * With some the systematized idea takes a
    religious turn, and the patient thinks he has some divine mission,
    or has received some inspiration from God; or the idea may take
    a devotional turn and the patient become an acetic. It is not,
    however, to be assumed that all promoters of new religious and
    novel social ideas are paranoics. Many of these are simply the
    natural developments of ignorance and a somewhat emotional and
    unbalanced temperament. The characteristics of the paranoic is
    that his work is ineffective, his influence brief and trivial, his
    ideas really too absurd and impractical for even ignorant men to
    receive. _I do not class successful prophets and organizers like
    Joseph Smith, or great apostles of social reforms like Rousseau as
    paranoics_. Insane minds are not creative, but are weak and lack
    persistence in purpose or power of execution. [47]

It is not possible in this writing to enter into an extended
consideration of this theory. Neither indeed is it necessary. One
consideration alone is sufficient to overthrow these fanciful
speculations of Mr. Riley. "Hitherto," says Renan in his Life of
Christ, "it has never been given to aberration of mind to produce a
serious effect upon the progress of humanity." [48] As stated by Dana,
the work of the paranoic is ineffective, his influence brief and
trivial, his ideas impractical and absurd. I believe that doctrine.
The dreams and hallucinations of the epileptic end in mere dreams and
hallucinations; they never crystallize into great systems of philosophy
or into rational religious institutions. They never result in great
organizations capable of perpetuating that philosophy and that religion
in the world. No matter how nearly genius may be allied to madness, it
must remain genius and not degenerate to madness if it exercises any
permanent influence over the minds of men, such as Mormonism has done
over a large body of people, and resulted in permanent institutions.
There is much glamor of sophistry, which may be taken by some for
profound reason and argument, in Mr. Riley's book, but one word answers
this so called philosophical accounting for our Prophet: The work
accomplished by him, the institutions he founded, destroy the whole
fabric of premises and argument on which this theory is based. Great
as was the Prophet Joseph Smith--and he was great; to him more than to
any other man of modern times was it given to look deep into the things
that are; to comprehend the heavens, and the laws that obtain there; to
understand the earth, its history, and its mission. He looked into the
deep things of God, and out of the rich treasure of divine knowledge
there, he brought forth things both new and old for the instruction
of our race, the like of which, in some respects, had not been known
in previous dispensations. But great as Joseph Smith was, rising up
and towering far above him is the work that he accomplished through
divine guidance; that work is infinitely greater than the Prophet,
greater than all the prophets connected with it. Its consistency, its
permanency, its institutions, contradict the hallucination theory
advanced to account for its origin. [49]

This theory of Mr. Riley's may be said to now occupy the attention of
men, but as the theories of Campbell, the Spaulding theory, and the
Rigdon theory of origin have one by one been discarded as untenable,
and inadequate for the purposes for which they were invoked, so,
too, will this epilepsy and hallucination theory of Mr. Riley's be
discarded, since it will fail to give an adequate accounting for
the Book of Mormon, which, so long as the truth respecting it is
unbelieved, will remain to the world an enigma, a veritable literary
Sphinx, challenging the inquiry and speculations of the learned. But to
those who in simple faith will accept it for what it is, a revelation
from God, it will minister spiritual consolation, and by its plainness
and truth draw men into closer communion with God.


1. "Limits of Religious Thought," Mansel, Preface.

2. Doctrine and Covenants, Sec. 35.

3. Mr. Campbell's criticism of the Book of Mormon was published in the
"Millennial Harbinger," Vol. II, pp. 86-96, February, 1831.

4. The same phrase appears in the testimony of the Eight Witnesses, as
published in the first edition of the Book of Mormon, and the preface
published in the first edition, but omitted in all other editions, is
signed "The Author."

5. See announcement of copyright privileges in first edition of the
Book of Mormon 1830. It is also copied into the History of the Church,
Vol. I, pp. 58, 59.

6. Yet, in a work as late as 1902, on the subject of Mormonism,
published by Dodd, Mead & Co., great importance is attached to this
"author and proprietor" phrase, and indeed much of the force of the
author's argument is based upon it. See "Founder of Mormonism" I,
Woodbridge Riley, chapter iv.

7. See Vol. II., chapter ix.

8. See Vol. II., chapter vii.

9. See "Latter-day Saints Messenger and Advocate," Vol. II, p. 242,
where Mr. Campbell is represented as recommending Howe's "Mormonism
Unveiled," which first set forth and was mainly devoted to the
Spaulding theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon.

10. Mormonism Unveiled, (Howe), pp. 278-287.

11. See Church History, Vol. I., chapter xxv; Vol. II., chapter iv.

12. By some, it is claimed that Mrs. Davison's statement was put forth in
the "Boston Recorder" as an affidavit, but I have never seen it in the
form of an affidavit. All versions of it that have fallen into my hands
are merely in the form of a signed statement.

13. See Thompson's "Evidences," pp. 176-7.

14. Times and Seasons, Vol. I., p. 47.

15. See Preface to "New Light on Mormonism."

16. See "Mormonism Unveiled," pp. 278-280.

17. When this fact was brought to light in the early controversy over
the subject, it was claimed by Messrs. Austin--Storrs--Clark, who
were responsible for this forgery, that "Woman" in the text was a
typographical error and should be "Mormon." See Clark's Gleanings "By
the Way."

18. The orthography is the affidavit's.

19. See letters of Mr. Rice to Mr. Joseph Smith, President of the
"Reorganized Church," "History of the Church of Jesus Christ,"
[Reorganized] Vol. IV., pp. 471-473.

20. This is confirmed by a letter written by Hurlburt himself, in 1881,
at the request of Mrs. Ellen E. Dickenson, as follows:

Gibsonburg, Ohio, January 10, 1881.

To all whom it may concern:

In the year eighteen hundred and thirty-four (1834) I went from Geauga
Co., Ohio, to Munson, Hampden Co., Mass., where I found Mrs. Davison,
late widow of the Rev. Solomon Spaulding, late of Conneaut, Ashtabula
Co., Ohio. Of her I obtained a manuscript, supposing it to be the
manuscript of the romance written by the said Solomon Spaulding, called
"The Manuscript Found," which was reported to be the foundation of the
"Book of Mormon." I did not examine the manuscript until I got home,
when, upon examination, I found it to contain nothing of the kind, but
being a manuscript upon an entirely different subject. This manuscript
I left with E. D. Howe, of Painsville, Geauga Co., Ohio, now Lake Co.,
Ohio., with the understanding that when he had examined it he should
return it to the widow. Said Howe says the manuscript was destroyed by
fire, and further the deponent saith not.

(Signed) D. P. HURLBURT.

21. "New Light on Mormonism," p. 245.

22. Howe's "Mormonism," p. 288.

23. He refers to the witnesses living at Conneaut Creek, the substance
of whose testimony is previously quoted in his book, pp. 357-8.

24. Howe's "Mormonism," p. 288, (first edition, 1834).

25. Howe's "Mormonism," pp. 289, 290. "This manuscript received by
Hurlburt and by him given to Howe is the only Spaulding manuscript
written by Spaulding, making any reference to the antiquities of
America. It is the simon-pure and only "Manuscript Found." Against
this it is urged by our opponents that "no such title is discoverable
anywhere upon or in the body of the manuscript in the Oberlin library.
(American Historical Magazine, Sept. 1906, p. 386). And yet with
strange inconsistency the writer himself a few pages further on
admits--"It is even possible that this first manuscript [meaning the
one now at Oberlin], may at sometime have been labeled "Manuscript
Found." But what is better than any "label" on the manuscript inside
or outside; better than any admission of our opponent, is the fact
that this manuscript is the one Mr. Spaulding feigned to have found,
and that he pretended to translate into English. It is the "found"
manuscript, and the only one that Spaulding pretended or feigned to
have found. It is the one that Mrs. McKenstry says she had in her
hands "many times" at Sabine's after 1816; and that "on the outside of
this manuscript were written the words, "Manuscript Found." (American
Historical Magazine, March, 1909, pp. 190, 191.)

26. Howe's "Mormonism," pp. 289-290.

27. Ibid p. 289. Lambdin died 1826.

28. "Braden and Kelly Debate," p. 44.

29. Howe's "Mormonism," p. 289.

30. "New Light on Mormonism," p. 62.

31. Ibid p. 71.

32. Myth of the "Manuscript Found" (1883), pp. 35, 36. See also an
exhaustive treatise on the "Origin of the Book of Mormon", in the
"American Historical Magazine," published in New York by the American
Historical Society, during the years 1906-7; 1908-9. The articles in
support of the Spaulding theory are by Mr. Theodore Schroeder; and
the answer to these papers are by the author of this work, who hopes
to publish the discussion in his second volume on the "Defense of the
Faith and the Saints," now in course of preparation.

33. "Boston Journal." See also Smucker's "History of the Mormons,"
where the letter is given in full, pp. 45-8.

34. New Witnesses, Vol. II., pp. 250, 251.

35. "Late Persecutions," etc., Introduction, p. xi, xii.

36. "Church History," Vol. I., p. 122, 123.

37. Published by McMillan Co., 1902.

38. "The Story of the Mormons," Preface, p. vi.

39. "Story of the Mormons," Chapter ix, p. 74.

40. Vol. II, chapter iii.

41. Neander's "General History of the Christian Religion and Church,"
Vol. IV, pp. 618-20.

42. Neander's "General History of the Christian Religion and Church,"
Vol. IV, p. 227.

43. Revelations xiv: 6,7.

44. "The Founder of Mormonism," p. 172.

45. Ibid, p. 11.

46. "Nervous Diseases, Text Book on" (third edition), p. 408.

47. "Text Book of Nervous Diseases and Psychiatry" (sixth edition), pp.

48. "Life of Christ," p. 105.

49. During the October conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints, held in Salt Lake City, October, 1903, this writer
then made some remarks in criticism of Mr. Riley's book, at the close
of which remarks President Joseph F. Smith said:

"I have been delighted with the most excellent discourse that we have
listened to; but I desire to say that it is a wonderful revelation to
the Latter-day Saints, and especially to those who were familiar with
the Prophet Joseph Smith, to learn in these latter days that he was
an epileptic! I will simply remark, God be praised, that there are so
many still living who knew the Prophet Joseph well, and who are in a
position to bear testimony to the truth that no such condition ever
existed in the man."

See also "Defense of the Faith and the Saints." pp. 42-61.




_Errors of Style and Grammar_.

One of the chief objections to the Book of Mormon from the first has
been the uniformity of its literary style, and the defects in its
language--errors in grammar, New York Yankee localisms, and the use
of modern words--unwarranted, it is claimed, in the translation of an
ancient record. Alexander Campbell, in his attack upon the Book of
Mormon, 1831, on this subject, said:

    The book proposes to be written at intervals and by different
    persons during the long period of 1020 years, and yet for
    uniformity of style there never was a book more evidently written
    by one set of fingers, nor more certainly conceived in one cranium
    since the first book appeared in human language, than this same
    book. If I could swear to any man's voice, face, or person,
    assuming different names, I could swear that this book was written
    by one man. And as Joseph Smith is a very ignorant man and is
    called the "Author," on the title page, I cannot doubt for a single
    moment but that he is sole "Author and Proprietor" of it.

He then proceeds to point out the same idioms of speech in the preface
to the first edition--the Prophet's own composition, of course--in
the testimony of the witnesses, and in various parts of the Book of
Mormon proving, as he claims, unity of style and identity of authorship
for the various books that make up the volume. He points out a large
number of errors in grammar, also, a number of supposed anachronisms,
modernism, etc., giving the pages where the defects occur. Indeed, so
ample was Mr. Campbell's criticism on this point, that he has furnished
the materials for this argument against the Book of Mormon which has
been repeated by nearly all subsequent writers. Howe, for instance,
takes up the refrain in this manner:

    The style of the Book of Mormon is _sui generis_, and whoever
    peruses it will not have doubt but that the whole was framed and
    written by the same individual hand. [1]

Then follows quotations which he regards as justifying the conclusion.

Professor J. B. Turner of Illinois College, Jacksonville, Illinois, in
his "Mormonism in All Ages" follows in the same strain and uses like
illustrations. [2]

So also John Hyde in his "Mormonism." He perhaps is more elaborate in
his criticism on this point than any other Anti-Mormon writer excepting
Campbell. [3]

Samuel M. Smucker, also criticises in the same kind. [4]

So also Rev. M. T. Lamb devotes a chapter to the same kind of
criticism. [5]

Linn, adopts the same argument, and with some manifestations of glee,
quite unbecoming in a sober historian who professes to write at least a
serious history of Mormonism; but who, while he points to these defects
in grammatical construction, etc., he nowhere considers in any spirit
of fairness the evidences that tend to support the truth of the Book of
Mormon. [6]

The things to be considered in these objections, are:

First: does the uniformity of style exist: do the errors in grammar
exist; are there modernisms and localisms in the book, and more
especially in the first edition, since it was with this edition
that this criticism began? These questions must be answered in the
affirmative. The existence of uniformity of style, errors in grammar,
modernisms and localisms cannot be denied, as all know who have
investigated the matter. A comparison of current editions with the
first edition will disclose the fact that many of the most flagrant
verbal and grammatical errors have been corrected, besides many
unimportant changes, such as "which" and "that," to "who" and "whom,"
and vice verse, to conform to modern usage; [7] and many more such
corrections, without changing the slightest shade of statement or
thought, could still be made to advantage.

Many of these changes, perhaps most of them, were effected under the
supervision of the Prophet Joseph himself. In the preface to the second
edition published in Kirtland, 1837, the following occurs:

    Individuals acquainted with book printing are aware of the numerous
    typographical errors which always occur in manuscript editions.
    It is only necessary to say, that the whole has been carefully
    re-examined and compared with the original manuscript by Elder
    Joseph Smith, Jr., the translator of the Book of Mormon, assisted
    by the present printer, Brother Cowdery, who formerly wrote the
    greatest portion of the same as dictated by Brother Smith.

In the third edition published at Nauvoo, 1840, this occurs on the
title page:

    "_Carefully Revised by the Translator_."

Of course the fact that the Book of Mormon was published in a country
town, on a hand press, and by persons unfamiliar with book making, and
the proofs read by Oliver Cowdery, who was entirely without experience
in such work, will account for many errors verbal and grammatical. The
further fact that the employees at the printing establishment where the
book was published, where unfriendly to it, and were more anxious to
make it appear ridiculous than to turn out a good job, may account for
other errors that appear in the first edition. But after due allowance
is made for all these conditions, the errors are too numerous, and
of such a constitutional nature, that they cannot be explained away
by these unfavorable conditions under which the work was published.
Besides, examination of the fragment of the original manuscript, now
(1909) in possession of President Joseph F. Smith, discloses the fact
that many of the verbal errors in grammar are in the manuscript,
written as the Prophet dictated it.

Second: How are these errors in language to be accounted for? How is
it that errors in grammar are found in a work said to be translated
by the "gift and power of God, through the medium of the Urim and
Thummim?" Are these errors in language to be assigned to the Urim and
Thummim, or to God? Is it true, as stated by Professor Turner, that
such is the description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was
translated, that all accounts "agree in making the Lord responsible not
only for the thought, but also for the language of the book, from the
necessity of the case, for they [those who have described the manner
of translation] all claim that the words passed before Smith's eyes
while looking through the pellucid stones?" [8] Must we remember, as the
professor admonishes us to "remember," that according to Smith's story
"the Lord is responsible not only for the thought, but also for the
language of this new translation? The words of the translation being
read off through the stone spectacles?" [9]

For one, I refuse to accept this statement of the case. I do not
believe that the Lord is responsible for any defect of language that
occurs in the Book of Mormon, or any other revelation. On the contrary,
I stand with Moroni here: "And now, if there be faults [i.e. in the
Nephite record], they are the mistakes of men." [10] Also with Mormon:
"If there be faults, they be the faults of a man." [11]

If the Lord should speak directly to man without any intermediary
whatsoever, it is reasonable to conclude that his language would
be perfect in whatever tongue he spoke. If, however, he elected an
intermediary through whom to communicate his message to the world, the
language in which that message would be couched might, or might not, be
perfect, according as the intermediary was learned or unlearned in the
language through which the Lord communicated the revelation.

Third: Can these verbal errors, and errors in grammar, these modernisms
and localisms arise from equivalent defects in the original Nephite
records? That is to say, can these errors have been transferred from
the ancient Nephite language into our English idioms? I know how
unreasonable such a proposition as that will seem to readers in any
way familiar with translations. I speak of it, however, because there
are those friendly to the Book of Mormon who contend that such is the
case. Those who take this view believe that because the Prophet used
Urim and Thummim in the translation of the Nephite record, therefore,
the process of translation was a word for word bringing over from
the Nephite language into the English; that the instrument did the
translating rather than the Prophet, the latter merely looking into
Urim and Thummim as one may look into a mirror and tell what he sees
there reflected; and that, therefore, the translation was really an
absolutely "verbatim et literatim" translation of the record. They
further believe that since the instrument was of divine appointing it
could make no mistakes, and therefore if errors in the translation into
English occur it is because these errors were in the Nephite language
as recorded by Mormon.

As already remarked, to those at all acquainted with translation, this
will be recognized as impossible. They know that such a thing as an
absolute literal translation, or word for word bringing over from one
language into another is out of the question; that for the most part
such a literal translation would be meaningless, I give as examples the
following from the Latin:

    1. "_Aversum hostem-videre_"--original. "Turned away--foe--to
    see"--word for word. "To see a foe in flight"--translation. 2.
    "_Non satis commode_"--original. "Not--enough--conveniently"--word
    for word. "Not very conveniently"--translation. 3. "_Ad eas se
    applicant_"--original. "To--these--themselves--attach"--word
    for word. "They lean up against these"--translation. 4. "_Impii
    est virtutem parvi estimare_"--original. "Of an impious man--it
    is--virtue little--to value" word for word. "It is the mark
    of an impious man to think little of virtue"--translation.
    5. "_Christiani est quam plurimis prodesse_"--original. "Of
    a Christian--it is--as very many--to do good" word for word.
    "It is the duty of a Christian to do good to as many as

Fourth: Granting, as preforce we must, that there are verbal and
grammatical errors, together with modernisms and localisms, in the
English translation of the Nephite record; that the thought is
expressed not only in English idioms, but also, at times, in Western
New York localisms; that the whole body of phraseology is of the time
and place where the work of translation was done; and all the errors
are such as would be made by one circumstanced as Joseph Smith was as
to knowledge of the English language; and that these local idioms and
errors in grammar were not found in equivalent terms in the Nephite
language and brought over into English by a process of word for word
bring over--granting all these things, is there any way by which this
criticism, based upon the faulty English of the translation, may be
effectually met, and the truth still maintained that the translation of
the Book of Mormon was made by a man inspired of God, and aided by an
instrument of divine appointment?

I firmly believe that all these requirements can be met; that, as
a matter of fact, the defects in English in the Book of Mormon
constitute no real difficulty; that the difficulties, so far as they
exist, are of our own creation (I speak of those who accept the
Book of Mormon as a divine record); that our trouble arises through
having accepted too literally the necessarily second-hand accounting,
given by Martin Harris and David Whitmer, of the manner in which the
translation was done. Because it has been said that the Prophet saw
the Nephite characters in the Urim and Thummim; that the translation
would appear in English under these characters; that the Prophet
would read the translation to the scribe and that both characters and
translation would remain in Urim and Thummim until written--because
of this description of the manner of translation, our opponents have
insisted--and we by our silence have conceded to some extent--that
Joseph Smith had nothing to do with the translation except to see what
the instrument revealed and parrot-like repeat it; therefore it has
been concluded by our opponents that the translation must be attributed
entirely to the Urim and Thummim; and as it is unreasonable to think
that God, or a divine instrument provided by him for the purpose of
translating unknown languages--that is, that God directly or indirectly
could be charged with these errors in English--they have argued that
the translation was not inspired; that God had nothing to do with it;
that Joseph Smith's pretentions were blasphemous, and the Book of
Mormon untrue.

To this contention of our opponents we have either made no reply, being
quite generally of the opinion that there was little or no force in the
argument (a mistake in my judgment), or else have lamely and vainly
argued that the errors were in the original Nephite records, and were
brought over bodily into the translation, which is an absurdity.

The foundation for the answer to this objection and the argument by
which it is sustained was laid in Vol. I, chapter VII of this work,
where it is argued that the translation of the Book of Mormon was not
merely a mechanical process in which the instrument Urim and Thummim
did all and the Prophet nothing, except to give out to the scribe the
translation said to have appeared in the divine instrument. The Lord's
description of the manner of translating, by means of Urim and Thummim,
is cited there in proof that the translation was not mechanical; that
on the contrary it required deep thought, the employment, in fact, of
all the mental and spiritual powers of the translator; that it was
necessary for him to be in an exalted state of mind to get the meaning
of the Nephite characters at all. The thought, however, and the ideas
he obtained by concentrated mental effort, under the inspiration of
God; but the language in which the translation was thought out was
in such words and forms of expression as Joseph Smith could use; and
this mental translation in language was doubtless reflected in the
Urim and Thummim, where it remained until written by the scribe. And
now, as the Prophet Joseph was uneducated at the time of translating
the Nephite record, the language of his translation was in the faulty
English of one circumstanced as he was, and was of the period and place
when and where the translation took place. This I regard as a complete
answer to all the objections that can be urged upon the score of the
Book of Mormon's faulty English, and it is the only answer that can be
successfully made to it. Such faults as exist are the faults of men,
not of God. Such is the answer to this class of objections wherever
made against the scriptures, for this sort of objection is not confined
to the Book of Mormon. It has been urged with well nigh equal force
against the Bible. In fact, there are not wanting those who claim that
human speech, oral or written, is inadequate to convey a revelation
from God. [12]

"The human language," says one of these, "whether in speech or in
print, cannot be the vehicle of the word of God. The word of God exists
in something else. Did the book called the Bible excel in purity of
ideas and expression all the books now extant in the world, I would not
take it for my rule of faith, as being the word of God, because the
possibility would nevertheless exist of my being imposed upon." [13]

Again, the same author says:

    Human language, more especially as there is not an universal
    language, is incapable of being used as an universal means of
    unchangeable and uniform information, and therefore it is not the
    means that God useth in manifesting himself universally to man. It
    is only in the Creation that all our ideas and conceptions of a
    word of God can unite. The creation speaketh an universal language,
    independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and
    various as they be. It is an ever-existing original, which every
    man can read. [14]

This writer may be objected to on account of the ribald nature of his
criticism of the Bible, but nevertheless, in the foregoing paragraph he
represents the views of a very large class of people--a class that I
fear is increasing rather than diminishing in numbers.

This author attacks the Book of Isaiah in the following fashion:

    Whoever will take the trouble of reading the book ascribed
    to Isaiah will find it one of the most wild and disorderly
    compositions ever put together; it has neither beginning, middle,
    nor end; and, except a short historical part, and a few sketches of
    history in two or three of the first chapters, is one continued,
    incoherent, bombastical rant, full of extravagant metaphor without
    application, and destitute of meaning; a school-boy would scarcely
    have been excusable for writing such stuff; it is (at least in
    translation) that kind of composition and false taste that is
    properly called prose run mad. [15]

Referring to the entire volume of Hebrew scripture our author says:

    For my own part, my belief in the perfection of the Deity will not
    permit me to believe that a book so manifestly obscure, disorderly,
    and contradictory can be his work. I can write a better book
    myself! [16]

Other authors of the same school, and in like spirit attack the Hebrew
scriptures. What is the reply to such attacks? Fortunately, on this
point, I have at hand the views recently set forth of a very learned
man, and one of high character, the Reverend Joseph Armitage Robinson,
D. D., Dean of Westminister and Chaplain to King Edward VII of England.
In a recent lecture delivered in Westminster Abby on the subject, "How
the Bible Was Written," he says:

    The message of the Old Testament was not written by the Divine
    hand, nor dictated by an outward compulsion; it was planted in the
    hearts of men, and made to grow in a fruitful soil. And then they
    were required to express it in their own language, after their
    natural methods, and in accordance with the stage of knowledge
    which their time had reached. Their human faculties were purified
    and quickened by the Divine Spirit; but they spoke to their time
    in the language of their time; they spoke a spiritual message,
    accommodated to the experience of their age, a message of faith in
    God, and of righteousness as demanded by a righteous God. [17]

So, also, Lyman Abbot, in a series of lectures on "The Bible as

    Neither in ancient nor in modern theology is there a simpler, a
    more comprehensive statement of the origin and character of the
    Bible than in the single sentence with which the Second Epistle
    of Peter describes it: "Holy men of God spake, moved by the Holy
    Ghost." * * * According to this definition the Bible is written
    by good men, and it is written by good men under the inspiration
    or on-breathing of the Spirit of God. * * * * These men are not
    amanuenses who write by dictation; they embody in their writings
    their own experience, their own thought, their own life. Thus,
    we should expect to find in the Bible the personal equation of
    the writers strongly marked. We should expect, as the sunshine
    developes each seed after its kind, so the shining of God on the
    human soul would develop each germinant soul after its kind * * *
    We see not men writing as clerks write, embodying only the work
    of a dictator; we find in each one the stream, the current, the
    color of his own personality. We shall expect, also, to find all
    these men writing as Paul says he wrote: "We know in part, and we
    prophesy in part," and "We see in a glass darkly." [18]

Views similar to those were entertained by the late Henry Drummond,
the author of "Natural Law in the Spiritual World." Referring to the
writers of the Hebrew scripture he said:

    These men when they spoke were not typewriters. They were authors.
    They were not pens. They were men; and their individuality comes
    out in every page they wrote. Sometimes they write a better style
    than they do at other times. Sometimes their minds are clearer and
    their arguments more condensed and consecutive and logical. [19]
    Look at some of the envolved theological statements in the
    New Testament, and contrast them with the absolutely pellucid
    utterances of the same author written on a different occasion, when
    he was in a different mood. Those men were not mere pens, I repeat;
    they were authors, and it is not the book that is inspired, so much
    as the men. God inspired men to make an inspired book. * * * Just
    as a scientific man in communication with nature reads its secrets,
    drinks in its spirit, and writes it down, so a man who walks with
    God catches the mind of God and gets revelations from God and
    writes them down; religion is not the result of this, but the cause
    of it. [20]

Jenyns in his treatise on the "Internal Evidences of the Christian
Religion" says:

    Others there are who allow that a revelation from God may be
    both necessary and credible; but allege that the Scriptures,
    that is, the books of the Old and New Testament, cannot be
    that revelation--because in them are to be found errors and
    inconsistencies, fabulous stories, false facts, and false
    philosophy; which can never be derived from the fountain of all
    wisdom and truth. To this I reply that I readily acknowledge that
    the Scriptures are not revelations from God, but the history of
    them [i.e., the history of the revelations]. The revelation itself
    is derived from God; but the history of it is the production of
    men, and therefore the truth of it is not in the least affected
    by their fallibility, but depends on the internal evidence of its
    own supernatural excellence. If in these books such a religion as
    has been here described actually exists, no seeming or even real
    defects to be found in them can disprove the divine origin of this
    revelation, or invalidate my argument. * * * If any one could show
    that these books were never written by their pretended authors, but
    were posterior impositions on illiterate and credulous ages--all
    these wonderful discoveries would prove no more than this, that
    God, for reasons to us unknown, had thought proper to permit a
    revelation by him communicated to mankind, to be mixed with their
    ignorance, and corrupted by their frauds from its earliest infancy,
    in the same manner in which he has visibly permitted it to be
    mixed and corrupted from that period to the present hour. If in
    these books a religion superior to all human imagination actually
    exists, it is of no consequence to the proof of its divine origin,
    by what means it was there introduced, or with what human errors
    and imperfections it is blended. A diamond, though found in a bed
    of mud, is still a diamond, nor can the dirt which surrounds it
    depreciate its value or destroy its lustre.

The point of Jenyns' argument is, that both in doctrine and ethics
the New Testament is so far superior, so far surpasses in sublimity
of idea and beauty of moral precept, all that is known amongst men
outside of the New Testament, and is so far removed from the uninspired
utterances of men that he claims the conclusion to be irresistible that
the Christian Scriptures derive their origin immediately from God; that
the knowledge which they teach is divine, no matter what faults may be
charged to the expression of this knowledge. From this view point he
becomes almost reckless in the admission of errors and defects in the
writers of the New Testament. He has been much criticized, in fact,
by the professional Christian ministry--for he was a layman as to his
relation with the church, a member of the British parliament--for the
admission of errors in the New Testament in the passage I have quoted
above, but I think unjustly so. What is needed, both as to the New
Testament scriptures and the Nephite scriptures, is a thoroughgoing
recognition of the fact that the truth is of more consequence than the
form in which it is expressed. The wheat is of more importance than the
chaff in which it grows, and which holds it until the thrashing and the
winnowing. The question is not so much is all the mine-ledge gold, but
is there gold in the ledge. [21]

The inspiration of God falls upon a prophet as a white ray of light
may fall upon a prism, which separates the white ray of which it is
composed--blue, orange, red, green, etc. The clearness of these several
rays and the sharpness with which they are defined will depend upon
the purity, and perhaps the position, of the prism through which the
white ray passes. So with the white ray of God's inspiration falling
upon men. It receives different colorings or expressions through them
according to their personal characteristics. While it is true that the
inspiration of God may be so overwhelming in its force at times that
the prophet may well nigh lose his individuality, and become merely
the mouth-piece of God, the organ through which the Divine speaks, yet
the personality of the prophet is not usually so overwhelmed; hence
each prophet preserves even under the inspiration of God his agency
and his personal idiosyncrasies. Thus Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Amos,
Nephi, Mormon, Moroni, all preserve their individuality in conception
of ideas and in the expression of them, though inspired by the same
spirit. So also Joseph Smith imparted certain characteristics to his
translation of the Nephite record, notwithstanding the use of Urim
and Thummim and the inspiration of the Lord that rested upon him.
Just in what manner the Urim and Thummim was of assistance to him may
be beyond human power to at present explain, but of this we may be
certain, it was by no means the principal factor in the work; its place
must forever be regarded as secondary; it was an aid to the Prophet,
not he an aid to it; wonderful as it may be as a divine instrument
it could not be so marvelous as the mind of man, especially as the
mind of this man, Joseph Smith, this Seer, by way of pre-eminence; it
is Joseph the "Seer" who translated the Book of Mormon aided by Urim
and Thummim. This his statement: "Through the medium of the Urim and
Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God." [22] Mark
these words--"_I_ translated the record,"--not the Urim and Thummim. Of
course the Prophet recognizes in this, as he did in all his prophetic
work and his seership work, his obligation to the inspiration of
God, and surely I do not wish to detract from the inspiration of God
as a factor in his work. I merely desire to emphasize here that it
was the Prophet under the inspiration of God that did the work, and
that the divine instrument, Urim and Thummim, however wonderful,
was merely an aid to the Prophet, as "glasses" may be an aid to the
dim-sighted. But notwithstanding this aid provided by man's ingenuity,
it is the eye after all that does the seeing, though this contrivance
called "spectacles" helps the vision, and makes it more perfect. So,
analogously, but in some way unknown to us, the Urim and Thummim aided
the Prophet in his work of translation.

The defense of written revelation then against the existence of human
elements in it--evident limitations in the knowledge of prophets
concerning things other than the immediate matters on which they are
inspired of God; unequal expression of ideas, falling sometimes from
the sublime to the commonplace; lack of clearness and directness in
expression, circumlocution; [23] grammatical blunders; tautology;
sometimes long suspension of thought (a frequent fault of both Old and
New Testament writers), and some thought never completed at all--all
these and many other faults of mere construction,--disarrangement of
the mere garments of thought--are to be attributed to the weaknesses
of men and their limitations in knowledge, rather than to any fault
in the inspiration supplied of God. It is the body that is defective,
not the soul; the expression that is defective, not the inspired truth
struggling for utterance through the faulty diction of prophets,
ancient or modern--"If there be faults, they are the faults of men;
therefore, condemn not the things of God because of the faults of men,"
will yet come to be regarded as a golden text in defense of written


_Objections Based Upon the Existence of Passages in the Book of
Mormon Which Follow King James' Translation of the Bible Verbatim_.

It is objected to the Book of Mormon that there are found in it whole
chapters, besides many minor quotations, from King James' English
translation of the Bible. Since these chapters and passages in some
cases follow the "authorized English version" verbatim, and closely
resemble it in others; and as it is well known that in translating
from one language into another almost infinite variety of expression
is possible, the question arises, how is it that Joseph Smith in
translating from the Nephite plates by divine assistance follows so
closely an independent translation made in the ordinary way, by dint
of scholarship and patient labor, and by diligent comparison of former
translations. [24] This King James' translation was made by scholars of
the sixteenth century. It is well known that no two translations of the
same matter from one language to another, by different scholars, would
ever be alike, hence these passages from the Hebrew scriptures found
in the Book of Mormon, so closely resembling and in places following
word for word the language of the King James' translation, constitute a
difficulty, and what is regarded by some as an insurmountable objection
to the claims of the Book of Mormon. Nearly all the Anti-Mormon writers
raise this objection, though perhaps John Hyde, [25] 1857, makes the
most of it. Following him the Rev. M. T. Lamb, [26] 1887, and last, but
not least, Linn, [27] 1902.

This objection was most carefully and intelligently stated recently
(October 22, 1903), by Mr. H. Chamberlain, of Spencer, Iowa, U. S. A.,
in a letter of inquiry on the subject to President Joseph F. Smith, of
Salt Lake City, in the course of which he said:

    I find that Christ in quoting to the people on this side of the
    water, the third and fourth chapters of Malachi, quotes, according
    to the Book of Mormon, in the identical text of King James'
    version, not missing a word. I find chapters of Isaiah quoted
    practically in the same way. I find that in many instances, in
    his talks with the people, and to his disciples here, he used
    the identical language of King James' version, not omitting the
    words supplied by the translators. Now, I know that no two parties
    will take the same manuscript and make translations of a matter
    contained therein, and the language of the two translators be
    alike; indeed, the language employed by the two parties will widely
    differ. These translations are from different manuscripts, and from
    different languages, and still it appears in the Book of Mormon as
    King James' translation. I can conceive of no other way in which
    such a coincidence could have occurred, within the range of human
    experience, except where one writing is copied from another, and
    then it takes the utmost care to get them exactly alike, word
    for word, and letter for letter as this is. * * * Now, what I
    want to know is, how do you as a Church account for these things
    appearing in the Book of Mormon in the identical language of King
    James' version, when we know his version is faulty, and the same
    translators could not have made it twice alike themselves? Did
    Joseph copy it from the Bible, or did the Lord adopt this identical
    language in revealing it to Joseph? [28]

This communication was referred to the writer by President Smith for an
answer, which was written, and from which I quote:

"The difficulty which you point out of course has been recognized by
believers in the Book of Mormon, but I do not know that I can say that
the Church as yet has settled upon any explanation which could be
regarded as an authoritative view on the subject. Each one has been
left to settle the matter upon the lines which seem most reasonable
to him. As a matter of fact, though our opponents have frequently
called attention to the difficulty in question, it has not occasioned
any particular anxiety in the minds of our own people. Accepting the
overwhelming evidences that exist for the truth of the Book of Mormon,
we have regarded that difficulty, with some others, as of minor
importance, which would in time be satisfactorily settled. Still, I
realize the reasonableness of the objection that may be urged against
the Book of Mormon from the point of view from which you present the
subject, and realize that it constitutes a real difficulty; and one,
too, in which we have no word from the Prophet Joseph Smith, or those
who were immediately associated with him in bringing forth the Nephite
record, to aid us in a solution of the matter. We are left, therefore,
very largely to conjecture, based on the facts in the case, which facts
are most tersely put in your esteemed communication, viz:

"First. It is a fact that a number of passages in the Book of Mormon,
verses and whole chapters, run closely parallel in matter and
phraseology with passages in Isaiah, Malachi, and some parts of the New

"Second. It is a fact that no two persons will make translations of the
same matter from one language into another, and the language of the two
translations be alike.

"Third. It is a fact that the translations of the words of Isaiah,
of Malachi, and the words of the Savior, in the Book of Mormon, are
generally supposed to be independent translations from different
manuscripts or records and from different languages.

"Then, of course, comes your question: how can the strange fact be
accounted for, viz., that the translations in the Book of Mormon
corresponding to Isaiah, Malachi and the words of the Savior, are in
the language of King James' translation?

"Of course, you will remember that according to the Book of Mormon,
the Nephite colony carried with them to America so much of the Old
Testament as was in existence at the time of their departure from
Jerusalem (600 years B. C.). The prophecy of Malachi, chapters 3 and 4
quoted in the Book of Mormon was supplied by the Savior. The Nephites
engraved portions of these scriptures in their records, and this
both in the Hebrew, and what the Nephites called the reformed--i.e.,
altered--Egyptian. I simply mention this in passing, that you may
remember afresh how these passages came to be in the Nephite record,
and that you may remember that the Nephites had the Jewish scriptures
in much the same form as they were to be found in Judea, 600 B. C. When
the Savior came to the western world and appeared to the Nephites,
he had the same message to present to them that he had presented in
Palestine; the same ordinances of the gospel to establish, a similar
church organization to found, and the same ethical principles to
teach. The manner of the Savior's teaching would doubtless lead him to
present these great truths in the same forms of expression he had used
in teaching the Jews, so that in substance what he had taught as his
doctrines in Judea he would repeat in America. This is mentioned also,
by the way, that it may appear reasonable to you that in a general
manner the Savior must have taught the people in the western hemisphere
substantially the same things that he taught the people in Palestine.
With this remembered, I think we find a solution of the difficulty you
present in the following way: When Joseph Smith saw that the Nephite
record was quoting the prophecies of Isaiah, of Malachi, or the words
of the Savior, he took the English Bible and compared these passages as
far as they paralled each other, and finding that in substance, they
were alike, he adopted our English translation; and hence, we have the
sameness to which you refer.

"It should be understood also, in this connection, that while Joseph
Smith obtained the facts and ideas from the Nephite characters through
the inspiration of God, he was left to express those facts and ideas,
in the main, in such language as he could command; and when he found
that parts of the Nephite record closely parallel passages in the
Bible, and being conscious that the language of our English Bible
was superior to his own, he adopted it, except for those differences
indicated in the Nephite original which here and there made the Book of
Mormon version of passages superior in sense and clearness. Of course,
I recognize the fact that this is but a conjecture; but I believe it
to be a reasonable one; and indeed the only one which satisfactorily
disposes of the difficulty you point out.

"There exists, however, another difficulty; and that is, while the
foreging explanation may account for the sameness in phraseology
between these Book of Mormon passages and King James' translation,
there remains to be accounted for the differences that exist between
these Book of Mormon passages and those which parallel them in King
James' translation. I am led to believe that you have been so absorbed,
perhaps, in tracing out the sameness in the expression that you have
failed to note the differences to which I allude, for you make the
claim of strict identity between the Book of Mormon and King James'
translation too strong when you say that there is used the "identical
language of King James' [29] version, not even omitting the words
supplied by the translators." Throughout the parallel passages, there
are here and there differences (with the single exception, perhaps, in
the chapters from Malachi, and even in these is a slight difference),
and a close comparison of these differences will show that in the
matter of supplied words by King James' translators, there are very
frequent changes, and in all the changes that appear, the Book of
Mormon passages are far superior in sense and clearness. I quote you a
few passages in illustration:

  BOOK OF MORMON.                          BIBLE.

  Thou hast multiplied the nation        Thou hast multiplied the nation
  and increased the joy;                 _and not_ increased the joy:
  they joy before thee according         they joy before thee according
  to the joy in harvest, and             to the joy in harvest, and
  as men rejoice when they divide        as men rejoice when they divide
  the spoils!--II. Nephi xxix: 3.        the spoil!--Isaiah ix: 3.

Here you will find the Book of Mormon passage more in harmony with the
facts in the case. How inconsistent the passage is in Isaiah, "Thou
has multiplied the nation and not increased the joy!" And yet that
statement is followed by this one--"they joy before thee according to
the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil!"
But in the Book of Mormon it is perfectly consistent, for there it
says "Thou hast multiplied the nation, _and increased the joy_." The
following passages also indicate the superiority of the Book of Mormon

  BOOK OF MORMON.                       BIBLE.

  And when they shall say unto         And when they shall say unto
  you, Seek unto them that             you, Seek unto them that
  have familiar spirits, and unto      have familiar spirits, and unto
  wizards that peep and mutter;        wizards that peep and mutter;
  should not a people seek unto        should not a people seek unto
  their God, for the living to         their God? for the living to
  hear from the                        the dead.--Isaiah viii: 19.
  dead?--II. Nephi xvii: 19.

As an illustration of my statement that Book of Mormon version of
passages is sometimes markedly different from our common English
version in the matter of supplied words, I quote you the following
passages. The supplied words in the Bible text are written in _italics_.

  BOOK OF MORMON.                           BIBLE.

  Say unto the righteous               Say unto the righteous that
  that it is well with them; for       _it shall be_ well _with him_: for
  they shall eat the fruit of their    they shall eat the fruit of their
  doings.                              doings.

  Woe unto the wicked! for             Woe unto the wicked! _it shall
  they shall perish; for the reward    be_ well _with him_: for the reward
  of their hands shall be upon         of his hands shall be
  them.--II. Nephi xxiii: 10, 11.      given him.--Isaiah iii: 10, 11.

If you will carefully compare the passages in the Book of Mormon,
and some of the chapters in Matthew, say the 12th chapter of III.
Nephi, with Matthew v; the 13th chapter of III. Nephi with Matthew 6th
chapter; the 14th chapter of III. Nephi, with Matthew 7th chapter, you
will also find throughout that there are differences between the two,
as much so as between the Catholic Bible (generally called the Douay
Bible) and King James' translation, which, of course, are independent
translations by different scholars. I give the following passages by
way of illustration:

  Matt. ch. v: verse 3.   III. Nephi ch. xii:   Matt. ch. v: verse 3.
                                verse 3.
  Blessed are the         Yea, blessed are      Blessed are the
  poor in spirit: for     the poor in spirit    poor in spirit; for
  theirs is the kingdom   who come unto me [30]  theirs is the kingdom
  of heaven.              for theirs is the     of heaven.
                          kingdom of heaven.

      Verse 4.                 Verse 4.             Verse 5. [31]
  Blessed are they       And again, blessed    Blessed are they
  that mourn: for they   are they that mourn,  that mourn: for
  shall be comforted.    for they shall be     they shall be comforted.

      Verse 6.                 Verse 6.              Verse 6.
  Blessed are they        And blessed are all  Blessed are they
  which do hunger and     they who do hunger   that hunger and
  thirst after            and thirst after     thirst after justice:
  righteousness: for      righteousness, for   for they shall have
  they shall be filled.   they shall be filled their fill.
                          with the
                          Holy Ghost. [32]

      Verse 7.                 Verse 7.              Verse 7.
  Blessed are the        And blessed are       Blessed are the
  merciful for they      the merciful, for     merciful for they
  shall obtain mercy.    they shall obtain     shall obtain mercy.

      Verse 10.               Verse 10.             Verse 10.
  Blessed are they       And blessed are       Blessed are they
  which are persecuted   all they who are      that suffer persecution
  for righteousness      persecuted for my     for justice's
  sake: for theirs is    name's sake, for      sake: for theirs is
  the kingdom of         theirs is the         the kingdom of
  heaven.                kingdom of heaven.    heaven.

     Verse 12.                Verse 12.              Verse 12.
  Rejoice, and be        For ye shall have     Be glad and rejoice,
  exceeding glad: for    great joy and be      for your reward
  great is your reward   exceeding glad, for   is very great
  in heaven: for so      great shall be your   in heaven; for so
  persecuted they the    reward in heaven,     they persecuted the
  prophets which were    for so persecuted     prophets that were
  before you.            they the prophets     before you.
                         who were before you.

  Chapter vi: verse 25.   Chapter xiii: verse 25.   Chapter vi: verse 25.
  Therefore I say         And now it came           Therefore I say
  unto you, take no       to pass that when         unto you, be not solicitous
  thought for your        Jesus had spoken          for your
  life, what ye shall     these words, he           life, what you shall
  eat, or what ye shall   looked upon the           eat nor for your
  drink; nor yet for      twelve whom he had        body what you shall
  your body, what ye      chosen, and said unto     put on. Is not the
  shall put on. Is        them, [33] Remember        life more than the
  not the life more       the words which           meat: and the body
  than meat, and the      I have spoken. For        more than raiment?
  body than raiment?      behold, ye are they
                          whom I have chosen
                          to minister unto
                          unto this people.
                          Therefore I say unto
                          you, take no thought
                          for your life, what ye
                          shall eat, or what ye
                          shall drink; nor yet
                          for your body, what
                          ye shall put on. Is
                          not the life more
                          than meat, and the
                          body than raiment?

      Verse 26.              Verse 26.                 Verse 26.
  Behold the fowls        Behold the fowls         Behold the birds
  of the air: for they    of the air, for they     of the air, for they
  sow not, neither do     sow not, neither do      neither sow nor do
  they reap, nor gather   they reap, nor gather    they reap, nor gather
  in barns; yet your      into barns; yet          into barns; and
  heavenly Father         your heavenly Father     your heavenly Father
  feedeth them. Are       feedeth them. Are        feedeth them.
  ye not much better      ye not much better       Are not you of
  than they?              than they?               much more value
                                                   than they?

      Verse 27.              Verse 27.                Verse 27.
  Which of you by         Which of you by         Which of you by
  taking thought can      taking thought can      taking thought can
  add one cubit unto      add one cubit unto      add to his stature
  his stature?            his stature?            one cubit?

   Verses 28, 29.          Verses 28, 29.          Verses 28, 29.
  And why take ye         And why take ye         And for raiment
  thought for raiment?    thought for raiment?    why are you solicitous
  Consider the lilies     Consider the lilies     Consider the
  of the field, how       of the field, how       lilies of the field,
  they grow; they         they grow; they toil    how they grow; they
  toil not, neither do    not, neither do they    labor not, neither
  they spin: and yet      spin; and yet I say     do they spin. But I
  I say unto you, that    unto you, that even     say unto you, that
  even Solomon in all     Solomon, in all his     not even Solomon,
  his glory was not       glory was not arrayed   in all his glory, was
  arrayed like one of     like one of             arrayed as one of
  these.                  these.                  these.

     Verse 30.               Verse 30.               Verse 30.
  Wherefore, if God       Wherefore, if God       And if the grass
  so clothe the grass     so clothe the grass     of the field, which is
  of the field, which     of the field, which     today, and tomorrow
  today is, and tomorrow  today is, and tomorrow  is cast into the
  is cast into the        is cast into the        oven, God doth so
  oven, _shall he_ not    oven, even so will      clothe: how much
  much more _clothe_      he clothe you, if you   more you, O ye of
  you, O ye of little     are not of little       little faith?
  faith?                  faith?

  Verses 31, 32, 33.       Verses 31, 32, 33.      Verses 31, 32, 33.
  Therefore take no       Therefore, take no       Be not solicitous
  thought, saying         thought, saying          therefore, saying:
  What shall we eat?      What shall we eat?       What shall we eat:
  or, what shall we       or, what shall we        or what shall we
  drink? or Wherewith     drink, or wherewith      drink, or wherewith
  shall we be             shall we be clothed?     shall we be clothed?
  clothed? for after      For your heavenly        For after all these
  all these things do     Father knoweth that      things do the heathens
  the Gentiles seek:      ye have need of all      seek. For your
  For your heavenly       these things. But        Father knoweth that
  Father knoweth that     seek ye first the        you have need of all
  ye have need of all     kingdom of God and       these things. Seek
  these things. But       his righteousness,       ye therefore first the
  seek ye first the       and all these things     kingdom of God,
  kingdom of God and      shall be added unto      and his justice: and
  his righteousness,      you.                     all these things shall
  and all these things                             be added unto you.
  shall be added unto

     Verse 34.                Verse 34.                 Verse 34.
  Take therefore no       Take therefore no        Be not therefore
  thought for the         thought for the          solicitous for tomorrow.
  morrow: For the         morrow, for the          For the morrow
  morrow shall take       morrow shall take        will be solicitous
  thought for the         thought for the          for itself; sufficient
  things of itself.       things of itself.        for the day is
  Sufficient unto the     Sufficient is the day    the evil thereof.
  day is the evil         unto the evil
  thereof.                thereof. [34]

But how are these differences to be accounted for? They unquestionably
arise from the fact that the Prophet compared the King James'
translation with the parallel passages in the Nephite records, and when
he found the sense of the passage of the Nephite plates [35] superior
to that in the English version he made such changes as would give
the superior sense and clearness. This view is sustained by the fact
of uniform superiority of the Book of Mormon version wherever such
differences occur. It is also a significant fact that these changes
occur quite generally in the case of supplied words of the English
translators, and which in order to indicate that they are supplied
words, are printed in Italics. * * * * * I fancy to all this, however,
another inquiry will arise in your mind and that is since Joseph
Smith translated the Book of Mormon by means of the Urim and Thummim,
why is it that he did not give throughout a translation direct from
the Nephite plates, instead of following our English Bible, where
it paralleled passages on the plates, since translation by means of
the Urim and Thummim must have been so simple and so easy? It is at
this particular point where, in my opinion, a very great mistake is
made, both by our own people, and our friends in the world. That is,
translation by the Urim and Thummim is not so simple and easy a thing
as it might at first glance appear. Many have supposed that the Prophet
Joseph had merely to look into the Urim and Thummim, and there see,
without any thought or effort on his part, both the Nephite characters
and the translation in English. In other words, the instrument did
everything and the Prophet nothing, except merely to look in the Urim
and Thummim as one might look into a mirror, and then give out what he
saw there. Such a view of the work of the Urim and Thummim I believe to
be altogether incorrect. I think it caused the Prophet the exercise of
all his intellectual and spiritual forces to obtain the translation;
that it was an exhausting work, one that taxed even his great powers to
their uttermost limit; and hence, when he could ease himself of those
labors by adopting a reasonably good translation already existing, I
think he was justified in doing so."

Such was the answer made to Mr. Chamberlain's inquiries, and as the
reader will doubtless be interested to know how this answer was
received by this unprejudiced gentleman, I quote the following from his
letter in response to the explanation. [36]

    Of course, I realize that if the Book of Mormon was not just what
    it purported to be, the whole fabric [of Mormonism] must fall
    to the ground, so far as being an inspired religion, and would
    then only be worth what good one could get out of it as the best
    organization or controlled religion on earth. * * * Upon studying
    the Book of Mormon, I, of course, found these portions of King
    James' version of our Bible, and judging it by the applied law of
    human experience, as we lawyers learn to judge everything, I could
    account for it in on other way, than that Joseph Smith copied it
    therefrom, and I am free to say that your reasons for his so doing
    are not only probable, but the only solution that can be given. * *
    * I believe and think that your suggestion is the only theory upon
    which it is possible to advocate its divine character. It seems to
    me that God, so far as I know, has never supplied man with what he
    already possessed, and Joseph Smith already had language with which
    to express his ideas, and all that was required in addition from
    God was, that he furnish him with the thought, and then let him
    express it in his own language. I never could for a moment believe
    that God is interested in placing his approval on King James'
    translators' style of translating, nor upon the composition of the
    English language therein adopted. I do not see wherein your theory
    detracts in any manner from the value of the Book of Mormon, as
    an inspired work acknowledged by God as authentic, nor makes more
    impracticable the manner of its introduction.


_Miscellaneous Objections Based on Literary Style and Language_.

The theory established that the language of the translation of the
Book of Mormon is Joseph Smith's, and that at least for extended
quotations from Isaiah and the New Testament writers he turned to the
common English version of the Bible and adopted it, the answer to all
objections based upon errors in literary style and grammar, and the
finding of many passages from the Hebrew prophets and New Testament
writers transcribed from King James' translation--is obvious:

(1) The language is Joseph Smith's; the errors in style and grammar are
due to his very limited education, for which the lack of educational
opportunities alone is responsible.

(2) To relieve himself somewhat of the mental strain in the work of
translation when he came to matter transcribed from the Hebrew prophets
into the Nephite record, or to instructions of the Messiah that
paralled his teachings to the people of Judea--of which there already
existed a reasonably good English translation--the Prophet adopted that
translation. [37]

The ideas underlying this explanation once adopted, it is equally easy
to meet the objections to the Book of Mormon based on the existence of
modern words and phraseology found in it; of provincialisms of the time
and place in which the translation was wrought; of phrases and words
from modern poets and religious exhorters. These words and phrases
made up the vocabulary of Joseph Smith; and his mode of expressing his
thought is that of the period and place in which he lived; and hence
the ideas obtained from the Nephite plates he couched in those modern
words, phrases and modes of expression familiar to him.

Sometimes, however, more is claimed for the existence of these
modern words, phrases and alleged quotations from modern poets than
is warranted. [38] For example: Campbell, Hyde, Lamb, Linn, and many
others, sarcastically remark that the words of Shakespeare are quoted
in a passage in the Book of Mormon accredited to Lehi, 2200 years
before Shakespeare was born! Linn puts it in this form:

    Shakespeare is proved a plagiarist by comparing his words with
    those of the second Nephi, who, speaking twenty-two hundred years
    before Shakespeare was born, said, "Hear the words of a trembling
    parent, whose limbs you must soon lay down in the cold and silent
    grave, from whence no traveler can return." [39]

The theory already advanced as an explanation of the existence of
modern words and phraseology in Joseph Smith's translation of the
Nephite record is adequate as an explanation of such instances of
modernisms as this. [40] Through school books extant, or through
listening to itinerant preachers, the Prophet might have become
acquainted with such phraseology as this alleged quotation from
Shakespeare, and employed it where it would express some Nephite idea
or thought found in the Nephite record. Still, this alleged quotation
from the British poet, at least, is susceptible of another explanation.

In the book of Job I find two passages either of which, and surely both
of them combined, would furnish the complete thought, and for that
matter largely, the phraseology to both Lehi and Shakespeare. I quote
Job's language, and afterwards that of Lehi's and Shakespeare's, that
the reader may compare them:

    1. _Job_, "Let me alone that I may take comfort a little before I
    go whence I shall not return, even to the land of darkness and the
    shadow of death." [41]

    "When a few years are come, then I shall go the way whence I shall
    not return." [42]

    2. _Lehi_, "Hear the words of a parent whose limbs you must soon
    lay down in the cold and silent grave, from whence no traveler can

    3. _Shakespeare_, "That undiscovered country from whose bourne no
    traveler returns."

It will be observed that the passage from the Book of Mormon follows
Job more closely than it does Shakespeare, both in thought and diction;
and this for the reason, doubtless, that Lehi had been impressed with
Job's idea [43] of going to a land whence he would not return; and
Joseph Smith being familiar with Job, and very likely not familiar with
Shakespeare, when he came to Lehi's thought he expressed it nearly in
Job's phraseology; and undoubtedly Shakespeare paraphrased his now
celebrated passage from Job.

It is also objected that many of the prophecies of the Book of Mormon
respecting the earth-career of Messiah, especially the prophecies found
in first Nephi, are given sometimes in the language of accomplished
fact. [44] "Lehi," says Campbell, "was a greater Prophet than any of the
Jewish prophets, and uttered all the events of the Christian Era and
developed the records of Matthew, Luke, and John 600 years before John
the Baptist was born." He follows the general statement with a number
of passages illustrative of it.

This circumstance of writing prophecy in the language of accomplished
fact, however, ought not to appeal to orthodox Christians as a very
serious objection to the prophecies in the Book of Mormon, since they
have on their hands the fifty third chapter of Isaiah to account
for. This chapter by a consensus of opinion of orthodox Christian
scholarship is regarded as a wonderful prophecy, outlining the earth
life, character and redemptive mission of the Christ; and for the most
part this prophecy is given in the language of accomplished fact. I
quote part of the chapter conceded to refer to the Christ:

    He hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is
    no beauty that we should desire him.

    He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and
    acquainted with grief, and we hid as it were our faces from him; he
    was despised, and we esteemed him not.

    Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we did
    esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

    But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our
    iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with
    his stripes we are healed.

    All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his
    own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

    He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his
    mouth; he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep
    before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

    He was taken from prison and from judgment; and who shall declare
    his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living:
    for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

    And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his
    death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in
    his mouth. (Isaiah, LIII: 2-10.)

Surely after this it is not worth while for orthodox Christians to be
objecting to prophecies in the Book of Mormon on the ground that they
are written in the language of accomplished fact. So far from this
peculiarity of Isaiah's having brought him into disrepute as a prophet,
it seems to have added to his glory, because so writing his prophecy,
it is claimed, has given a vividness to his predictions, an exactness
that made the messianic prophecies all the more valuable. "The
prophecies regarding the Messiah's birth, passion, glory, rejection by
the Jews, and acceptance by the Gentiles are so exact as to have earned
him the name of the 'Gospel Prophet.' "--(Oxford Bible Helps--Isaiah).
It should be remembered, too, in this connection, that the Book of
Isaiah's prophecies carried by the colony of Lehi into the Western
hemisphere with them became a powerful influence among the Nephite
writers. His book is quoted from more extensively than any other book
of the Jewish scriptures possessed by the Nephites; and that because
of the plainness with which Isaiah spoke of the coming and mission of
Messiah. The first Nephi, commenting upon Isaiah and the esteem in
which he held his writing, said:

    And now I, Nephi, write more of the words of Isaiah, for my soul
    delighteth in his words. For I will liken [apply] his words unto
    my people, and I will send them forth unto all my children, for he
    verily saw my Redeemer, even as I have seen him. And my brother
    Jacob also has seen him as I have seen him, wherefore I will send
    their words forth unto my children, to prove unto them that my
    words are true.

Small wonder then if a prophet held in such large esteem, as was
Isaiah, and so extensively quoted, influenced prophetic Nephite
literature, and led to the habit of writing prophecies referring to the
Christ in the language of accomplished fact.

The Rev. M. T. Lamb, in his "Golden Bible" makes practically the
same charges as Mr. Campbell, saying, in addition that many of the
quotations from the Jewish scriptures found in the Book of Mormon, are
written "in the exact language of the New Testament."

It is sufficient to say to this objection that Joseph Smith having a
full knowledge of the facts of the Christian story, as related in the
New Testament, clothed the ideas caught from the Nephite record in New
Testament phraseology; and it has been suggested that he may have done
so in places in stronger terms than a rigidly strict translation might
have warranted. [45]

It is not necessary to go into detail in considering this
objection, [46] or of objections of similar nature, for the reason
that this whole class of objections is met completely by the theory
suggested in these pages concerning the translation of the Book of


_The Difficulty of Passages from Isaiah Being Quoted by Nephite
Writers, that Modern Bible Criticism (Higher Criticism) Holds Were Not
Written Until the Time of the Babylonian Captivity--586-538 B. C., and
not Written by Isaiah at all_.

It is held that Isaiah's historical period--the period of his
ministry--runs through the reign of four kings of Judah--Uzziah,
Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah. Some extend his ministry over into the reign
of Manasseh, by whose edict, it is said, he was sawn asunder. In any
event Isaiah would be a very aged man at the close of the reign of
Hezekiah, 698 B. C.; and he would have been between eighty and ninety
at the accession of Manesseh. So that it is safe to say that life
ended soon after the close of Hezekiah's reign. Now if it be true that
the latter part of the Book of Isaiah, from chapter forty to chapter
sixty-six, inclusive, was not written until and during the Babylonian
Captivity, 586-538 B. C.--as assumed by modern criticism--then of
course the prophet Isaiah did not write that part of the book which
bears his name as author.

Again: If it be true that these chapters 40-66 were not written until
and during the Babylonian captivity, then Lehi could not have taken
that part of the book of Isaiah with him into the wilderness and
subsequently brought it with him to America, where his son Nephi copied
passages and whole chapters into the record he engraved upon plates
called the plates of Nephi, [47] since Lehi left Jerusalem 600 years B.

The difficulty presented by the Higher Criticism is obvious, viz: If
Joseph Smith is representing the first Nephi as transcribing into his
Nephite records passages and whole chapters purporting to have been
written by Isaiah, when as a matter of fact those chapters were not
written until a hundred and twenty-five or a hundred and fifty years
after Isaiah's death; and not until fifty years after Lehi's colony
had departed from Jerusalem, then Joseph Smith is representing Nephi
as doing that which is impossible, and throws the whole Book of Mormon
under suspicion of being fraudulent. This, therefore, becomes a very
interesting as well as a very important objection; and many among the
Higher Critics will say a fatal one. Here it can only be treated in
outline; it is undoubtedly worthy of exhaustive analysis.

The Book of Isaiah divides into two parts: first, chapters 1-39,
universally allowed to be the work of the prophet Isaiah, whose
ministry extended through the reigns of the four kings mentioned
in Isaiah i:1; second, chapters 40-66, written by an unknown
author, nearly one hundred and fifty years after Isaiah, sometimes
called Isaiah II. It is claimed that these chapters 40-66; "form a
continuous prophecy, dealing throughout with a common theme, viz,
Israel's restoration from exile in Babylon. * * Jerusalem and the
temple have been for long in ruins--the 'old waste places;' Israel
is in exile." [48] It is to these conditions that the unknown prophet
addresses himself. His object is to awaken faith in the certainty of an
approaching restoration.

Three independent lines of argument are said to establish this theory
of the authorship of chapters 40-66 in the Book of Isaiah:

    (1) The internal evidence supplied by the prophecy itself points
    to this period [time of the captivity] as that at which it
    was written. It alludes repeatedly to Jerusalem as ruined and
    deserted; to the sufferings which the Jews have experienced, or
    are experiencing, at the hands of the Chaldaeans; to the prospect
    of return, which, as the prophet speaks, is imminent. Those whom
    the prophet addresses, and, moreover, addresses in person--arguing
    with them, appealing to them, striving to win their assent by
    his warm and impassioned rhetoric--are not the men of Jerusalem,
    contemporaries of Ahaz and Hezekiah, or even of Manasseh, they are
    the exiles in Babylonia. Judged by the analogy of prophecy, this
    constitutes the strongest possible presumption that the author
    actually lived in the period which he thus describes, and is not
    merely (as has been supposed) Isaiah immersed in spirit in the
    future, and holding converse, as it were, with the generations
    yet unborn. Such an immersion, in the future would be not only
    with parallel in the O. T., it would be contrary to the nature of
    prophecy. The prophet speaks always, in the first instance, to his
    own contemporaries: the message which he brings intimately related
    with the circumstances of his time; his promises and predictions,
    however far they reach into the future, nevertheless rest upon the
    basis of the history of his own age, and correspond to the needs
    which are then felt. The prophet never abandons his own historical
    position, but speaks from it. [49]

    (2) The argument derived from the historic function of prophecy
    is confirmed by the literary style of c. 40-66, which is very
    different from that of Isaiah 1-39. Isaiah 1-39 shows strongly
    marked individualities of style; he is fond of particular images
    and phrases, many of which are used by no other writer of the O.
    T. Now, in the chapters which contain evident allusions to the
    age of Isaiah himself, these expressions occur repeatedly; in the
    chapters which are without such allusions, and which thus authorize
    prima facie the inference that they belong to a different, age,
    they are absent, and new images and phrases appear instead. This
    coincidence cannot be accidental. The subject of c. 40-66 is not
    so different from that of Isaiah's prophecies (e.g.) against the
    Assyrians, as to necessitate a new phraseology and rhetorical form.
    The differences can only be reasonably explained by the supposition
    of a change of author. [50]

    (3) The theological ideas of c. 40-66 (in so far as they are
    not of that fundamental kind common to the prophets generally)
    differ remarkably from those which appear, from c. 1-39, to be
    distinctive of Isaiah. Thus, on the nature of God generally, the
    ideas expressed are much larger and fuller. Isaiah, for instance,
    depicts the majesty of Jehovah: in c. 40-66 the prophet emphasizes
    his infinitude; He is the Creator, the Sustainer of the universe,
    the Life-Giver, the Author of history, the First and the Last, the
    Incomparable One. This is a real difference. And yet it cannot
    be argued that opportunities for such assertions of Jehovah's
    power and Godhead would not have presented themselves naturally
    to Isaiah whilst he was engaged in defying the armies of Assyria.
    But, in truth, c. 40-66 show an advance upon Isaiah, not only in
    the substance of their theology, but also in the form in which it
    is presented; truths which are merely affirmed in Isaiah being here
    made the subject of reflection and argument. [51]

These arguments when expressed in these general terms seem quite
formidable; but they are much stronger in general statement than when
one follows the advocates of them through all the references cited by
them in support of the theory; for then one is impressed with the very
heavy weights which the Higher Criticism hangs on very slender threads.
As before remarked, however, I may not go beyond outline treatment of
the matter here.

The first thing those of us who believe Isaiah to be the author of
the whole book through so many ages accredited to him, both by Jews
and Christians--the first thing we have a right to demand of these
innovators is: If Isaiah the prophet is not the author of the last
twenty-seven chapters of the book that bears his name, who is the
author? Confessedly chapters 40-66 of Isaiah are the most important
part of the book. How is it that chapters 1-39 can be assigned an
author, but the more important chapters 40-66 have to be assigned to
an "unknown" author? Was knowledge in those antique times so imperfect
that the author of such a remarkable production as Isaiah 40-66 could
not be ascertained?

Second, there is no heading to this second division of Isaiah 40-66;
and it is not true that this second part is unconnected with the first
part. Allowing something to the spirit of prophecy in Isaiah, by which
I mean a power to foresee events, which carries with it a power in the
prophet to project himself into the midst of those things foreseen, and
to speak from the midst of them as if they were present--as indeed they
were to his consciousness--and there is an immediate connection between
the two parts. Chapter 39 predicts the Babylonian captivity. Hezekiah
has just been made to hear the word of the Lord--

    Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that
    which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be
    carried to Babylon; nothing shall be left, saith the Lord.

    And thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget,
    shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of
    the king of Babylon. (Isaiah 39:6-7.)

In the opening chapter of the supposed second division of Isaiah,
chapter 40, the prophet launches out upon that series of prophecies
that treat, first, of the deliverance of Israel from this captivity
just spoken of through Cyrus, king of Persia; and, second, a larger
deliverance of Israel through the redemption brought to pass by the
Christ. Because of this close and logical connection between the
supposed divisions of the book, one is justified in holding that the
inscription of chapter i:1, applies to the whole book, and implies that
Isaiah is the author of the second part, 40-66, as well as of the first
part, 1-39. "Nor do the words concerning Judah and Jerusalem," says an
eminent authority, "oppose the idea that the inscription applied to the
whole; for whatever he [Isaiah] says against other nations, he says on
account of their relation to Judah." [52]

Second, the Higher Critics must deal with some facts of history before
their claims can be allowed. According to Josephus, the Jews showed
the prophecies of Isaiah (chapter 44:28; 45:1-13)to Cyrus the king, to
induce him to return the Jews to Jerusalem and order the building of
the temple, upon which Cyrus issued the following decree:

    Thus saith Cyrus the king, Since God Almighty hath appointed me
    to be king of the habitable earth, I believe that he is that God
    which the nation of the Israelites worship, for indeed he foretold
    my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at
    Jerusalem, in the country of Judea.

    This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left
    behind him of his prophecies; for this prophet said, that God had
    spoken thus to him in a secret vision; "My will is, that Cyrus,
    whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations, send
    back my people to their own land, and build my temple." This was
    foretold by Isaiah one hundred and forty years before the temple
    was demolished. Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the
    divine power, an earnest desire and ambition seized upon him, to
    fulfill what was so written. [53]

The above is confirmed also by Ezra i:2. Now the value of this
exhibition of the word of the Lord to Cyrus grew out of the
circumstance that it was a prophecy uttered by Isaiah one hundred and
fifty years before it came to the knowledge of Cyrus. It was the fact
that it was "foreknowledge" that caused Cyrus to admire the divine
power thus displayed; it was this that stirred him with the ambition to
fulfill what was so written. Now either we must believe that the pious
Jews, anxious to return to the land of their fathers, rebuild their
temple and resume the thread of their national existence, deceived by
a wretched subterfuge the king of Persia, and induced him to make this
proclamation by such means; or else they really exhibited to him the
writings of Isaiah, and this real prophecy respecting himself, fraught
with such mighty consequences to a people chosen of God to stand as his
witness among the nations of the earth. I cannot think that this action
so important in the development of God's purposes respecting his people
was founded in fraud; nor do I believe such mighty results were brought
about by disclosing the prognostications of some "unknown" contemporary
whose "eye had marked Cyrus in the distance as the coming deliverer of
his nation;" such cause would be inadequate to the results.

Again, Luke represents the Christ as reading a passage from this second
division of Isaiah (chapter 61:1, 2), and reading it as coming from
Isaiah; and also as being fulfilled in his own person:

    And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up; and as his
    custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and
    stood up for to read.

    And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias
   [Isaiah]. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where
    it was written.

    The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed
    me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal
    the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and
    recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are
    bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

    And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and
    sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were
    fastened on him.

    And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled
    in your ears.

    And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which
    proceeded out of his mouth. (Luke iv: 16-22).

One can scarcely think of Jesus being mistaken in respect of the
authorship of the scripture from which he read, especially respecting
a prophecy relating to himself. Furthermore, whoever wrote Isaiah 61:
1, 2, whether Isaiah, the admitted author of Isaiah chapters 1-39, or
some other author a hundred and fifty or two hundred years later, and
in the midst of the scenes of the Babylonian captivity, this much is
true: he projected himself forward some several hundreds of years into
the times of the beginning of the Christ's mission, (if we may believe
the Christ when he applies the prophecy to himself and proclaims the
fulfillment of it in the happenings of that day), speaks in the present
tense, as if pleading with the men of his own day. So that if this
power is admitted as being possessed by the supposed "unknown" author
of chapters 40-66, it might as well be accorded to Isaiah as to him;
and if that power be accorded to a prophetic writer, then all the
difficulties conjured up by our modern critics, and to overcome which
their theories were invoked, meet with easy solution.

As to the difference of literary style between the first and second
division of Isaiah's book, urging as necessary the belief in different
authors for the two parts. I am disposed to give considerable weight
to such evidence, since I know how strong the tendency in expression
towards individuation is, but those more competent to judge of that
subject than I am, hold that of all the prophetic writers, Isaiah
possesses the widest range of literary style, the largest richness in
coloring and forms of expression. And this when the view of his style
is confined to that part of his book of which all allow he is the
author. As for example, the one author most assured that Isaiah did not
write chapters 40-66 of the book that bears his name, the author of
"An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament," speaking of
Isaiah, and of course limiting his comment to the author of chapters
1-39, says:

    Isaiah's poetical genius is superb. His characteristics are
    grandeur and beauty of conception, wealth of imagination, vividness
    of illustration, compressed energy and splendor of diction. * * *
    * * * Examples of picturesque and impressive imagery are indeed
    so abundant that selection is difficult. These may be instanced,
    however: the banner raised aloft upon the mountains; the restless
    roar of the sea; the waters rising with irresistible might; the
    forest consumed rapidly in the circling flames, or stripped of
    its foliage by an unseen hand; the raised way; the rushing of
    many waters; the storm driving or beating down all before it; the
    monster funeral pyre; Jehovah's hand "stretched out," or "swung,"
    over the earth, and bearing consternation with it. Especially
    grand are the figures under which he conceives Jehovah as "rising
    up," being "exalted," or otherwise asserting His majesty against
    those who would treat it with disregard or disdain. * * * * * The
    brilliancy and power of Isaiah's genius appear further in the
    sudden contrasts, and pointed antitheses and retorts, in which he

    Isaiah's literary style shows similar characteristics. It is
    chaste and dignified: the language is choice, but devoid of
    all artificiality or stiffness, every sentence is compact and
    forcible; the rhythm is stately; the periods are finely rounded;
    Isaiah indulges occasionally--in the manner of his people--in
    tone-painting, and sometimes enforces his meaning by an effective
    assonance, but never to excess, or as a meretricious ornament.
    His style is never diffuse: even his longest discourses are not
    monotonous or prolix; he knows how to treat his subject fruitfully,
    and, as he moves along, to bring before his reader new and varied
    aspects of it; thus he seizes a number of salient points, and
    presents each singly in a vivid picture. * * * * No prophet has
    Isaiah's power either of conception or of expression; none has the
    same command of noble thoughts, or can present them in the same
    noble and attractive language.

Immerse such a writer as this into the spirit of the future, give him
the theme of Israel's deliverance from Babylonian captivity, or the
larger deliverance of Israel and the world from sin and death through
the mission of the Christ; and what new coloring may he not give to
his style? What greater depths of truth respecting God and man may he
not sound, calling for new phraseology, new words and combinations to
express the deeper knowledge of the enlarged "vision?" This I believe
is what happened to the prophet. He was so immersed; and his style
under the inspiration of God rose to meet the new environment and the
enlarged views given by the wider vision.

One of the most forceful passages on this subject that I have yet
found is one written by Professor Daniel Smith Talcott, D. D., of the
Theological Seminary, Bangor, Maine. He contributes the Article on
"Isaiah" to Hackett's edition of Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, and
in the course of his treatise, referring to the diversity of style
between the two alleged parts of Isaiah, says:

    The array of linguistic evidence in proof of a diversity of
    authorship, which has gradually grown within the last century into
    the formidable proportions in which it meets us in the pages of
    Knobel and others, rests very largely upon an assumption which
    none of these critics have the hardihood distinctly to vindicate,
    namely, that within the narrow compass of the Hebrew literature
    that has come down to us from any given period, we have the means
    for arriving at an accurate estimate of all the resources which the
    language at that time possessed. When we have eliminated from the
    list of words and phrases relied upon to prove a later date than
    the time of Isaiah, everything the value of which to the argument
    must stand or fall with this assumption, there remains absolutely
    nothing which may not be reasonably referred to the reign of
    Hezekiah. Indeed, considering all the circumstances of the times,
    it might justly have been expected that the traces of foreign
    influence upon the language would be far more conspicuous in a
    writing of this date than they actually are in the controverted

    It is to be remembered that the ministry of the prophet must have
    extended through a period, at the lowest calculation, of nearly
    fifty years; a period signalized, especially during the reigns
    of Ahaz and Hezekiah, by constant and growing intercourse with
    foreign nations, thus involving continually new influences for
    the corruption of public morals and new dangers to the state, and
    making it incumbent upon him who had been divinely constituted at
    once the political adviser of the nation and its religious guide,
    to be habitually and intimately conversant among the people, so as
    to descry upon the instant every additional step taken in their
    downward course and the first approach of each new peril from
    abroad, and to be able to meet each successive phase of their
    necessities with forms of instruction, admonition, and warning, not
    only in their general purport, but in their very style and diction,
    accommodated to conditions hitherto unknown, and that were still
    perpetually changing.

    Now when we take all this into the account, and then imagine to
    ourselves the prophet, toward the close of this long period,
    entering upon what was in some respects a novel kind of labor,
    and writing out, with a special view to the benefit of a remote
    posterity, the suggestions of that mysterious _Theopneustia_
    to which his lips had been for so many years the channel of
    communication with his contemporaries, far from finding any
    difficulty in the diversities of style perceptible to the different
    portions of his prophecy, we shall only see fresh occasion to
    admire that native strength and grandeur of intellect, which have
    still left upon productions so widely remote from each other,
    in the time and circumstances of their composition, so plain an
    impress of one and the same overmastering individuality.--Smith's
    Bible Dictionary, Vol. II., p. 1165.

Believers in the Book of Mormon have no occasion of uneasiness because
passages from the latter part of Isaiah's book are found transcribed
into the Nephite record. The theories of modern critics have not
destroyed the integrity and unity of the Book of Isaiah. And after the
overwhelming evidences for the truth of the Book of Mormon are taken
into account; and it is found that on the plates of Nephi there were
transcripts from the latter part of Isaiah's writings, taken from a
copy of his prophecies carried by a colony of Jews from Jerusalem to
the western hemisphere, six hundred years before Christ--men will
discern in this discovery new evidence for the Isaiah authorship of the
whole book of Isaiah.


1. Howe's "Mormonism," p. 56.

2. "Mormonism in All Ages" (1842), p. 200.

3. See Hyde's "Mormonism" (1857), chapters 9, 10.

4. Smucker's "History of the Mormons" (1881 edition), p. 49.

5. "The Golden Bible" (1887), chapter 7.

6. "The Story of the Mormons" (1902), chapter 11.

7. Linn says that there are more than 3,000 such changes.

This, I think, is an exaggeration. "Story of the Mormons," p. 89. In
1889, Lamoni Call, formerly a Mormon, published a treatise on the
subject which he entitled "Two Thousand Changes in the Book of Mormon,"
even this I think is an exaggeration; but there have been many changes
as conceded in the text.

8. "Mormonism in All Ages," p. 19.

9. Ibid, p. 200.

10. Moroni's Preface, title page Book of Mormon.

11. Mormon viii: 17.

12. There is some justification for such a view as this, if we have in
mind the idea of God making a full and perfect revelation to man. When
God gives a revelation it necessarily has to be such an one as man can
comprehend, and in terms with which he is familiar--in man's language;
and as man's language is inadequate to express truth in its perfection,
it follows that any revelation which God deigns to give to the children
of men will fall somewhat below the perfect truth, hence the Apostle
of the Gentiles declared, notwithstanding the existence of revelations
in the scriptures which were extant in Paul's time, "We know in part,
and we prophesy in part; we see [as] through a glass, darkly." This
condition arises not out of any lack of power on the part of God to
make a perfect revelation of truth, but out of man's inability to
comprehend such a revelation; and hence God graciously condescends to
meet man's somewhat narrow limitations by giving such a revelation of
truth in the scriptures, as man by faith and diligence may comprehend.

13. "The Age of Reason," Paine, p. 19.

14. Ibid, p. 25.

15. "The Age of Reason," Part II, p. 98.

That Joseph Smith appreciated how inadequate human language is to
express divine thought is evident from the following prayer of his,
uttered when writing to his friend, W. W. Phelps: "Oh Lord God, deliver
us in due time from the little, narrow prison, almost, as it were,
total darkness of paper, pen and ink--and a crooked, broken, scattered
and imperfect language."--History of the Church, Vol. I, pp. 227-8.

16. Ibid p. 252.

17. The lecture was published in the "St. Louis Globe-Democrat," of
Sunday, March 19, 1905.

18. Dr. Abbott delivered these lectures in Plymouth Church, Brooklyn,
during the winter of 1896.

19. This is also true of the translation of the Book of Mormon. Some of
its passages rise to heights of sublimity, and then again descending to
levels that are commonplace and labored.

20. "The Evolution of Bible Study" (Henry Drummond, 1901).

21. Replying to this criticism of the Book of Mormon some time ago
(June, 1904), wherein the critic insisted that the question concerning
the Book of Mormon was not where men say they got it, but "is it
gold"--he insisted that the "assay test" must be applied--to which the
writer made the following reply:

"I declare my willingness, as one of the believers in the Book of
Mormon to see it submitted, as perforce it must be, to the 'assay
test.' Is it gold? Are these important truths we have been considering
this evening, wherein the welfare of half the world is concerned, gold
or dross? Is the light which the Book of Mormon throws upon the word of
God contained in the four (New Testament) Gospels of importance? (See
this Vol. ch. 42: vi for the items here referred to). Is the fact that
Jesus visited this western world and announced the saving power of his
Gospel in such a manner that millions finally came to the knowledge of
salvation a golden truth? Is the solemn warning to the Gentile nations
inhabiting the western world (See chapter 42.) Worth while considering?
May not these prophecies be golden, especially if needed? I shall
leave you to answer that. But I want to suggest an improvement on the
gentleman's simile--to this 'assay test.' I think it could be improved.
The question is not so much as to whether in the four (New Testament)
Gospels or in the fifth (i.e., the Book of III Nephi in the Book of
Mormon) all is gold, but is there gold in them. I do not think the
four Gospels are without alloy. In other words I do not think the four
Gospels are perfect. I believe there are imperfections in them in forms
of expressions and in the fact that they do not convey all that Jesus
both taught and did; at best they are but fragmentary. St. John informs
us in his Gospel that if all the things that Jesus had done were
written, the world itself would hardly contain the books. We have not
the full reports of Messiah's discourses. The full and absolutely pure
world of God just as it fell from the lips of the Savior, is not in the
four Gospels. For the most part we have but the recollections of the
evangelists of what Jesus said and did. Only those who read the Greek,
and unfortunately they are very few, may read even the four Gospels in
the language in which the Apostles wrote them. We have translations of
these records, and each time they are translated dilution takes place.
The force of what is said becomes in the translation somewhat abated. *
* * So with the book of III Nephi, that comes to us in abridged form.
It is not the original book of Nephi; it is Mormon's abridgment of
that book. He has condensed it, and in doing so has doubtless given us
less perfect accounts of Christ's mission to the Nephites [than would
have been found in the unabridged book of III Nephi]. That is to say,
we have not all the surrounding circumstances or all the utterances
of the Savior, or of the men the book represents as speaking. Then we
have not even Mormon's original abridgment of Nephi's book--the real
fifth Gospel--but only the Prophet Joseph's translation of Mormon's
abridgment, and that it is admitted in his imperfect English. So that
the whole five Gospels are fragmentary and tainted with imperfections
and limitations, as all things are that pass through human hands; but
they contain nevertheless, God's precious truths [the gold of the
mine]; and some of these are found in the fifth Gospel as well as in
the four Hebrew Gospels; and to me the truths of the fifth or Nephite
Gospel are as precious and important as are those of the other four
Gospels." (Discourse by the writer, "The Fifth Gospel," "Deseret
Evening News," June 11, 1904). The whole discourse will be found in
"Defense of the Faith and the Saints," Vol. I, pp. 373-399.

22. "Millennial Star," Vol. XIX, p. 118.

23. One Anti-Mormon writer--the Rev. M. T. Lamb--devotes two chapters
to this subject of circumlocution alone--"The Golden Bible," chapters
i and ii. He brings into contrast passages from the Book of Mormon,
lacking in directness of expression, with passages from the Bible
celebrated for their directness, and thereby is most unfair in his
argument; because he compares the best of the Bible with the worst
of the Book of Mormon, a proceeding which might be reversed with
disastrous results to the Bible, if the comparison were to end with
this comparison of the worst in the one with the best in the other.
Now let it be understood that I am not contending that the English
translation of the Book of Mormon compares as literature with the
English translation of the Hebrew scriptures. The latter is a
translation by the most finished scholarship of the time in which it
was accomplished--I refer to the authorized version, the translation
completed 1611 A. D.--while the Book of Mormon is translated by an
unlearned youth limited in educational opportunities, without even the
advantage of a common school education. True, it is claimed for him
that he was assisted by a divine inspiration. That, however, insures
only the accuracy of the facts, the statement of the truth as contained
in the Nephite record, not directness, accuracy, or charm of literary
style. As for circumlocution in the expression of thought, that is but
natural to one possessed of only a limited vocabulary. The existence
of circumlocution, therefore, in the Book of Mormon is in harmony with
and helps to illustrate what in these pages has been contended for, as
to the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated, and the fact
that the Prophet Joseph was left to express the thought he received
from the Nephite record in such language as he could command; which
theory of translation once accepted, I here repeat, makes easy an
answer to all the objections urged upon the ground of literary defects
in the Book of Mormon.

24. See translator's preface and title page of the "Authorized English

25. Hyde's "Mormonism," chapters ix, x, xi.

26. "Golden Bible," chapter vii.

27. Linn's "Story of the Mormons," chapter xi.

28. "Improvement Era," Vol. VIII (1904), pp. 180, 181.

29. When the translators of our English Bible found it necessary to
supply words to make clear the meaning in English, they printed those
words in italics, and it is to these words that reference is made in
the above.

30. The addition of the words in this verse, "who come unto me," are
important. Surely, it is not enough for man to be merely poor in
spirit. Not on that hinges salvation. A man can be poor in spirit and
still fail of salvation; but "blessed are the poor in spirit 'who
come unto me,' for theirs is the kingdom of heaven," is a reasonable

31. Verses four and five in the "Douay" version are transposed, hence
verse 5 here.

32. The addition of the words, "with the Holy Ghost" are important to
this passage, for they make the statement of Messiah more definite, and
take the passage out of all controversy as to what those who hunger and
thirst after righteousness shall be filled with. They shall be filled
with the Holy Ghost, the spiritual power that makes for righteousness.

33. Observe that this and the remaining passages quoted from the Book
of Mormon are addressed directly to the Twelve Apostles, to whom
especially they apply, not to the multitude. May it not be that when
Jesus gave the same instructions in Judea he made a like distinction?
If so, it was to the Twelve that he said: "Take no thought for the
morrow; for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself.
Sufficient is the day unto the evil thereof." That is a passage of
scripture against which infidels have leveled their sarcasms ever
since it was written. They have denounced it as instruction utterly
impractical; as false in theory, as it would be impossible to practice;
and as giving the evidence that Jesus was a mere idle dreamer, not a
practical reformer. For, say they, this doctrine of taking no thought
of the morrow, and taking no thought respecting food and raiment, if
applied to the world's affairs, would turn the wheels of progress
backward, and plunge the world into a state of barbarism. There could
be no civilization under such conditions, they argue; and man would go
back to the condition of the savage. I have never heard a Christian
argument against that assault that has been an answer to it. But I find
the key to the situation in this Book of Mormon version of the passage.
It throws a flood of light upon this matter that makes the defense of
the doctrine of Christ not only possible but easy against the assaults
of the infidel world. This instruction about taking no thought for the
morrow was not addressed to the multitude, nor is it to be followed
generally by the members of the Church, nor by the people of the world
at large. Jesus confines his instructions on this head, according to
this Book of Mormon version, to the twelve men whom he chose among his
disciples, and especially commissioned to go and preach the gospel; he
admonishes them to so completely dedicate themselves unto the Lord that
they would give no thought to these temporal things, but put heart, and
soul into the work of their ministry; and promises that their Father
in heaven, who knew they had need of food and raiment, would open the
way for them; and by his bounty and grace would clothe them even as he
clothed the lilies of the field; and care for them as he cared for the
birds of the air. Thus limited to the twelve men especially dedicated
to God's service, the doctrine is reasonable and practical, and subject
to no objection that may not be successfully answered.

34. "Sufficient is the day unto the evil thereof." I suggest a
comparison here to that found in the other two versions, the
Protestant, the Catholic. The Protestant: "Sufficient unto the day is
the evil thereof;" the Catholic: "Sufficient for the day is the evil
thereof." In the Protestant and Catholic versions you will observe that
the evil is made sufficient for the day; in the Book of Mormon version
the day is made sufficient for the evil. Three learned commentators
in collaboration--Jamieson, Fausett, Brown--say of that sentence as
it stands in the Protestant version: "An admirable, practical maxim,
better rendered in our version than in any other, not excepting
the preceding English ones. Every day brings its own cares, and to
anticipate is only to doubt them." If these learned commentators can
thus speak in high praise of the saying of the Savior as it stands in
Matthew, how much more reason they would have for praising it as it is
found in the Book of Mormon!

35. Or it may be that the changes occurred to the inspired mind of the
Prophet when reading the English version, without referring to the
Nephite plates. In this connection it is to be remembered that the
Prophet, 1831-1833, was engaged in such an inspired "revision" of the
Old and New Testament, sometimes miscalled a "New Translation" of the
Bible. It is more proper, however, to speak of it as a "revision,"
as the Prophet did not at any time pretend to the knowledge of the
ancient languages that would enable him to translate from the Hebrew
or Greek, as translation is commonly understood. What he did was to
revise the English text of the Bible under the inspiration of God, and
that led him not only to give different renderings of various passages,
but also to supply missing parts made known to him by the inspiration
of God. The fact that he thus made a "revision" of the scriptures
rather inclines one to the belief that when he turned from the Nephite
records, to what must have been substantially parallel passages in the
English version, the changes were suggested to him in this manner;
that is, by the inspiration of the Lord operating in his mind when
reading the English text. And indeed, may it not be possible that these
changes suggested by the Spirit when reading the English text, during
the translation of the Book of Mormon, led him finally to attempt the
revision of the whole body of the Hebrew scriptures from the English
text? It is interesting to note that it was by such an inspiration in
relation to the 29th verse of the 5th chapter of John's Gospel, that
led not only to a different reading of the text, but also to that
marvelous vision of the future state of man, and the different degrees
of glory that he will inherit. The text in the English version stands,
"And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection
of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of
damnation." To the Prophet it was given, "and shall come forth, they
who have done good in the resurrection of the just; and they who have
done evil in the resurrection of the unjust;" then followed the vision.

36. The correspondence in full is to be found in the "Improvement Era"
for January, 1904, pp. 179-196.

37. For confirmation of the likelihood of his taking such a course, see
his letter to the saints in Nauvoo on the subject of baptism for the
dead (Doc. & Cov., Sec. 128: 17, 18). He quotes the 5th and 6th verses
of the last chapter of Malachi, precisely as it reads in the authorized
English version, and then adds: "I might have rendered a plainer
translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as
it stands." Long before Moroni had given him a different rendition as

           BIBLE.                              MORONI.

  "Behold I will send you Elijah,      "Behold, I will reveal unto
  the prophet, before the              you the Priesthood by the hand
  coming of the great and terrible     of Elijah, the prophet, before
  day of the Lord;                     the coming of the great and
                                       dreadful day of the Lord.

  "And he shall turn the heart         "And he shall plant in the
  of the fathers to the children,      hearts of the children the
  and the heart of the children        promises made to the fathers,
  to their fathers, lest I come and    and the hearts of the children
  smite the earth with a curse.        shall turn to their fathers; if
                                       it were not so, the whole earth
                                       would be utterly wasted at his

And yet the prophet used the passage as it is found in Malachi, since
it suited the prophet's purpose as it stood.

38. The Rev. M. T. Lamb, author of the "Golden Bible, or the Book of
Mormon. Is it from God," delivering a lecture in the town of Coalville,
Utah, had the following experience: In the course of his remarks the
reverend gentleman related how he had sat down to read the Book of
Mormon for the purpose of really ascertaining for himself if it were
true or false. He related how he found on the very first page of the
book the statement that Lehi's family consisted of his wife Sariah,
and his four sons, Laman, Lemuel, Sam and Nephi. "Sam, Sam," said he,
"that sounds familiar! Sam, it occurs to me that I have heard that
name somewhere before! Sam! Oh, yes, I remember, 'Sam' is the Yankee
nickname for Samuel! Right then and there," said the speaker, "I had
my doubts as to this book being a genuine, ancient record, since I
found a modern Yankee contraction of a proper name given as the name of
an ancient personage!" At the conclusion of his remarks the reverend
gentleman gave opportunity for questions on the subject of his lecture.
Whereupon, Elder W. W. Cluff of the "Mormon" faith, arose, and in the
course of a good-natured and informal discussion he asked the Rev.
Mr. Lamb what he would think of a person who would sit down and begin
an examination of the pentateuch--the books accredited to Moses, and
the most ancient of the Hebrew scriptures (except, perhaps, the book
of Job), to ascertain its truth, and coming to the enumeration of the
names of the sons of Jacob finds one of them named "Dan." "Dan, Dan,"
says this supposed investigator, "Dan, why it seems to me that I have
heard that name before! sounds familiar! Oh, I remember now, 'Dan'
is the Yankee nickname for 'Daniel.' Therefore the writings of Moses
cannot be genuine, because here is a Yankee nickname given as the
name of a very ancient personage, therefore these alleged writings of
Moses must be modern; hence, not what they have claimed to be, ancient
inspired scriptures!" It is needless to say that the Rev. M. T. Lamb
had nothing further to say on this point. The simple parallel was too
much for him.

39. Linn's "Story of the Mormons," p. 96.

40. "Through nature to nature's God" is another instance referred to
by many anti-Mormon writers as being in the Book of Mormon (although
this writer has failed to find it), and is also in Pope's Essay on man.
"The God of nature suffers" (First Nephi 19: 11-12), an expression used
by the first Nephi, quoting the words of the prophet Zenos; this, be
it remembered, several hundred years before Christ. This expression
is accredited to Dionysius, the areopagite, supposed to be living at
the time of the Savior's death on the cross, and who, as he beheld the
sun hide its face, and witnessed the bursting of the rocks and felt
the earth tremble, exclaimed: "Either the God of Nature suffers or the
universe is falling apart." And it is sneeringly urged that "Nephi,
2400 years ago, hears the saying of a pagan who lives 634 years after
him!" (Campbell.)

41. Job x: 20-21.

42. Job xvi: 22.

43. It must be remembered that Lehi's colony carried with them, in
their journey to the western hemisphere, the Jewish scriptures extant
up to 600 B. C., which scriptures doubtless included the book of Job;
hence my remark that Lehi was doubtless familiar with Job's reflection
concerning death--of his going whence he would not return.

44. I Nephi 22: 21. II Nephi 31: 5-10.

45. Such, substantially, is a suggestion made by Mr. H. Chamberlain,
Esq., whom I have quoted before in this chapter.

46. In the course of a brief discussion of the Book of Mormon, carried
on through one of the leading journals of Salt Lake City, with an
"Unknown" writer, the following rule of criticism, on the objection
discussed in the text, was laid down:

"Any book which professes to have been written in ancient times and yet
quotes from authors not born until centuries afterwards, is a spurious

To which the writer made the following reply:

"This canon of criticism, however serviceable when applied to books
in general, can in no sense be made to do service against the Book of
Mormon. When he formulated his canon of criticism, as throughout the
discussion, the 'Unknown' failed to recognize the fact that, while
the Book of Mormon is an ancient book, it is largely a prophetic
book; and the strongest complaint that can be made against it along
the line of the 'Unknown's' criticism is that some of its prophecies
are here and there translated in phraseology somewhat similar to that
of writers living subsequent to the period in which it was written.
In explanation of this fact I have urged that the translator, Joseph
Smith, being acquainted with the New Testament [and to a limited extent
with the popular phrases of some modern writers] and his diction being
influenced by the phraseology of those writers, sometimes expressed the
thoughts and predictions of the ancient writers in the New Testament
phrases. So that the question at issue at this point of the discussion
is, first, whether the ancient writers in the Book of Mormon could have
been acquainted with the events, to them then future, found recorded in
the Book of Mormon, and is the theory reasonable that in translating
their statement of these events Joseph Smith's diction would be
influenced by the phraseology of the New Testament? In dealing with
the question of the New Testament phraseology in the Book of Mormon it
is Joseph Smith that has to be dealt with, not Nephi [or other Book of
Mormon writers], the translator, not the original writers."

The whole controversy, consisting of four papers, will be found in the
writer's "Defense of the Faith and the Saints." Vol. I. pp. 313-354.

47. Isaiah chapter 48 is found in I. Nephi, chapter 20; Isaiah 49 in I.
Nephi 21; Isaiah 50 in II. Nephi, 7; Isaiah 51 in II. Nephi, 8; Isaiah
53 in Mosiah 14; Isaiah 52:9, 10; in III. Nephi 18-20; Isaiah 54 in
III. Nephi 22.

48. Driver's Introduction to the Literature of the Old
Testament--Isaiah, p. 230.

49. Driver's Introduction, pp. 336, 337.

50. Ibid. p. 238.

51. Ibid., p. 242.

52. Jamieson-Faussett-Brown Commentary, Introduction to Isaiah.

53. Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI., chapter I.




_Pre-Christian Era Knowledge of the Gospel_.

Among the early objections to the Book of Mormon, supposed to be
unanswerable, was that based upon the fact that the Nephites hundreds
of years before the birth of Christ had knowledge of him and the
redemption he would bring to pass for man, and the means of grace
through which salvation would be accomplished. In fact, that they had
knowledge of the Christian institution. "He," (Joseph Smith) "represents
the Christian institution," says Alexander Campbell, "as practiced
among his Israelites before Christ was born! And his Jews are called
'Christians' while keeping the law of Moses, the Holy Sabbath, and
worship in their temple, at their altars, and by their High Priest!"

Of late, however, not so much importance has been attached to this
objection. It is becoming more and more recognized as a truth that the
gospel of Christ was known from very ancient times, from before the
foundations of the world in fact. Jesus, in scripture, is known as the
"Lamb slain from before the foundations of the world," and certain ones
are spoken of as having their names written in the "Book of Life" from
the foundation of the world. [1]

Paul speaks of the hope of "eternal life, which God that cannot lie,
promised before the world began." [2] Men were not left in ignorance of
the plan of their redemption until the coming of the Messiah in the
flesh, even in the old world. Our annals are imperfect on that head,
doubtless, but enough evidence exists even in the Jewish scriptures to
indicate the existence of the knowledge of the fact of the Atonement
and of the redemption of man through that means. Abel, the son of
Adam, offered the firstlings of his flock as a sacrifice unto God. How
came he to make such an offering, except that behind the sacrifice,
as behind similar offerings in subsequent ages, stood the fact of the
Christ's Atonement? In such sacrifice, was figured forth the means of
man's redemption--through a sacrifice, and that the sacrifice of the
first-born. Paul also refers to the sacrifices and other things of the
law of Moses as "having a shadow of good things to come." [3] But where
learned Abel to offer sacrifices if not from his father, Adam? It is
reasonably certain that Adam as well as Abel offered sacrifices, in
like manner and for the same intent. Paul bears unmistakable testimony
to the fact that the gospel was preached unto Abraham; and also
that it was offered to Israel under Moses before "the law of carnal
commandments" was given. "I would not that ye should be ignorant," he
says, "how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed
through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in
the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink
the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that
followed them, and that Rock was Christ." [4]

Paul's great controversy with the Christian Jews was in relation to the
superiority of the gospel to the law of Moses. Many of the Christian
Jews, while accepting Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah, still
held to the law with something like superstitious reverence, and could
not be persuaded that the gospel superseded the law, and was, in fact,
a fulfillment of all its types and symbols. This controversy culminated
in Paul's now celebrated letter to the Galatians, wherein he says:

    Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the
    children of Abraham. And the scriptures, foreseeing that God would
    justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto
    Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. Now to
    Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He sayeth not And to
    seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
    And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of
    God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years
    after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none
    effect. Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of
    transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was
    made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
    Wherefore the law was our school-master to bring us unto Christ,
    that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come,
    we are no longer under a school-master. For ye are all the children
    of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

After this testimony to the knowledge of the gospel existing among
the ancients, it is useless for modern critics of the Book of Mormon
to complain of the knowledge of the Christian institution possessed
by the Nephites, and the fact that the Book of Mormon proclaims the
existence of that knowledge. If it shall be said that the Nephites had
clearer conceptions of it than the people inhabiting the old world,
that fact would arise not out of God's unwillingness to make known the
great truth, but to the fact that the Nephites succeeded in living more
nearly within his favor; and hence their clearer knowledge of the truth.

It should be remembered that prophecy is but history reversed. Known
unto God are all his works and words from the beginning to the end; and
at various times he has made known future events in the clearest manner
to his prophets who, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, have
recorded them. The Prophet Isaiah, 150 years before the birth of Cyrus,
foretold his name; declared that he should subdue kingdoms, including
Babylon, set free the people of God held in bondage there, and rebuild
the House of the Lord at Jerusalem. And all this as clearly as the
historians could write it after the events themselves took place. To
Daniel he revealed the rise, fall and succession of the leading empires
and nations of the world, even to the time of the establishment of
God's Kingdom in power to hold universal sway in the latter days, an
event not yet fulfilled.

It is clearer even from the Hebrew scriptures that the Lord has
been willing, and even anxious, that a knowledge of the Christian
institution should be had among men from the beginning. To the prophets
of Israel, in fact, nearly every important event in the life of the
Savior was made known. They foretold that he would be born of a virgin;
that his name would signify "God with us;" that Bethlehem would be the
place of his birth; that he would sojourn in Egypt with his parents;
that he would reside in Nazareth, for "He shall be called a Nazarene;"
that a messenger would prepare the way before him; that he should
ride in triumph into Jerusalem upon a colt, the foal of an ass; that
he would be afflicted and despised; that he would be a man of sorrows
and acquainted with grief; that he would be despised and rejected of
men; that men would turn their faces from him in his affliction; that
he would be esteemed as stricken and smitten of God; that he would be
wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities; that the
chastisement of us men would be laid upon him, and by his stripes would
be healed; that upon him would God lay the iniquity of us all; that
for the transgressions of God's peoples would he be stricken; that he
would be oppressed and afflicted, yet open not his mouth; that as a
sheep before her shearers is dumb, so would he be silent before his
judges; that he would be betrayed for thirty pieces of silver; that men
would divide his raiment and cast lots for his vesture; that they would
give to him gall and vinegar to drink; that not a bone of him should
be broken; that he should be taken from prison and from judgment, and
be cut out of the land of the living; that he would make his grave
with the wicked and the rich in his death; but notwithstanding this
he should not see corruption (i. e., his body decay), and that on the
third day following his death he should rise triumphant from the grave.
All this and much more was foretold by the ancient Hebrew prophets
concerning the Messiah. This is prophetic history.

In like manner to the Nephites his prophetic history was made known,
and is found in the Book of Mormon in some instances in greater
plainness than in the Old Testament, because, for one thing--in
addition to the suggestion made that the Nephites may have lived nearer
to the Lord than other branches of the house of Israel--the Nephite
scriptures have not passed through the hands of an Aristobulus, a Philo
and other rabbis, who by interpretation or elimination have taken away
some of the plain and precious parts of the Jewish scriptures. Surely
if the Lord revealed to the Jewish prophets these leading events in the
history of the Savior ages before the Messiah's birth, it ought not to
be thought a strange thing if God imparted the same knowledge to the
Nephite prophets. Nor can the fact that he did so, and that in plainer
terms than in the revelations to the Jews, be held as valid objections
to the Book of Mormon.


_The Unlawfulness of Establishing the Priesthood With Other Than the
Tribe of Levi_.

Somewhat akin to the objections last considered is one based upon the
claim that it would be unlawful to establish a Priesthood other than
that founded by Moses, when he chose the tribe of Levi to officiate in
holy ordinances. In order that this objection, however, may be stated
in its full force I quote it as set forth by Alexander Campbell, not
even omitting the unfortunate coarseness of his language which was so
unworthy of his character, and which I assign to the spirit of those
times when coarseness was so often mistaken for forcefulness.

    Smith, its real author [i. e., of the Book of Mormon], as ignorant
    and as impudent a knave as ever wrote a book, betrays the cloven
    foot in basing his whole book upon a false fact, or a pretended
    fact, which makes God a liar. It is this: with the Jews God made a
    covenant at Mount Sinai, and instituted a priesthood, he separated
    Levi, and covenanted to give him this office irrevocably while
    ever the temple stood, or till the Messiah came. "Then," says God,
    "Moses shall appoint Aaron and his sons and they shall wait on the
    priest's office, and the stranger (the person of another family)
    who cometh nigh shall be put to death." (Numbers iii: 10.) "And
    the priests and sons of Levi shall come near; for them the Lord
    thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name
    of the Lord, and by their word shall every controversy and every
    stroke be tried." (Deut. xxi: 5). Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, with
    250 men of renown, rebelled against a part of the institution of
    the Priesthood, and the Lord destroyed them in the presence of the
    whole congregation. This was to be a memorial that no stranger
    invade any part of the office of the Priesthood. (Numbers xvi: 40).
    Fourteen thousand and seven hundred of the people were destroyed by
    a plague for murmuring against the memorial.

    In the 18th chapter of Numbers the Levites are again given to Aaron
    and his sons, and of the priesthood confirmed to them with this
    threat--"The stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death."
    "Even Jesus," says Paul, "were he on earth, could not be a priest;
    for he was of a tribe concerning which Moses spake nothing of
    priesthood." (Heb. vii: 13). So irrevocable was the grant of the
    priesthood to Levi, and of the high priesthood to Aaron, that no
    stranger dare approach the altar of God which Moses established.
    Hence Jesus himself was excluded from officiating as priest on
    earth according to the law.

    This Joseph Smith overlooked in his impious fraud, and makes his
    hero, Lehi, spring from Joseph. And just as soon as his sons return
    from the roll of his lineage, ascertaining that he was of the
    tribe of Joseph, he and his sons acceptably "offer sacrifices and
    burnt offerings to the Lord." (p. 15, first edition.) [5] Also it
    is repeated (p. 18)--Nephi became chief artificer, shipbuilder,
    and mariner; was scribe, prophet, priest, and king unto his own
    people, and "consecrated Jacob and Joseph, the sons of his father,
    priests to God and teachers--almost 600 years before the fulness
    of the times of the Jewish economy was completed. (p. 72.) Nephi
    represents himself withal "as under the law of Moses" (p. 105).
    They built a new temple in the new world, and in 55 years after
    they leave Jerusalem, make a new priesthood which God approbates.
    A high priest is also consecrated and yet they are all the while
    "teaching the law of Moses, and exhorting the people to keep it!"
    (pp. 146, 209.) Thus God is represented as instituting, approbating
    and blessing a new priesthood from the tribe of Joseph, concerning
    which Moses gave no commandment concerning priesthood. Although God
    had promised in the law of Moses that if any man, not of the tribe
    and family of Levi and Aaron should approach the office of priest,
    he would surely die; he is represented by Smith as blessing,
    approbating, and sustaining another family in this appropriated
    office. The God of Abraham or Joseph Smith must, then, be a liar!
    And who will hesitate to pronounce him an imposter? This lie runs
    through his record for the first 600 years of his history.

I have stated this objection, at length, because much importance has
been attached to it and many have regarded it as unanswerable. I
consider its importance has been exaggerated, and the whole objection
based upon conceptions of the right and power of God and his freedom of
action, as altogether too narrow and dogmatic.

It is to be observed, first of all, that the inhibitions against others
being appointed to the priesthood that was given to Aaron and the
Levites, are inhibitions against "men" assuming the right to institute
any other order of priesthood in Israel, or to grant the rights of
this priesthood to any other tribe than that appointed by the Lord.
Because of these inhibitions against "men" presuming to change the
order which God has established, to therefore assume that God, to meet
other conditions--such as these, for instance in the establishment of
a branch of the house of Israel in the new world--the case of Lehi
and his colony--that God cannot make such changes in the matter of
establishing a priesthood as seemeth him good, is preposterous.

I think the argument of this point might be closed here, for surely no
one would be so unreasonable as to contend that the inhibitions which
God imposes upon men are to be made operative upon himself.

In the treatment of the objection preceding the one now under
consideration I pointed out the fact of the antiquity of the gospel,
showing that even unto Abraham the gospel had been preached, and that
the law of Moses, usually called the law of carnal commandments, had
been "added" to the gospel because of the transgressions of Israel,
from which fact it is evident that the gospel was administered in those
ancient, patriarchial times. It was a higher law than the law of Moses.
It was the everlasting covenant of God with man and the blood of Christ
is spoken of as being the blood of that everlasting covenant. [6] There
was a priesthood that administered the ordinances of that gospel, and
as the gospel was a higher law than the law of Moses, it is reasonable
to conclude that the priesthood which administered in those ordinances
was a higher order of priesthood than that conferred upon Aaron and
the tribe of Levi, and undoubtedly the higher priesthood could, on
occasion, administer in the ordinances of the inferior law. It was,
doubtless, this higher order of Priesthood that such characters as
Abraham, Melchizedek, and other prophets in Israel held, and by which
they administered in sacred things. It was this order of priesthood
that was held by Lehi and Nephi, and which the latter conferred upon
his brothers, Jacob, and Joseph. [7] The former referring to his
priesthood says, that he had been "ordained after the manner of this
(the Lord's) holy order," that being the way in which this higher
priesthood, of which I am speaking, is designated throughout the Book
of Mormon. [8] Called also a priesthood "after the order of the Son of
God." It was this priesthood, therefore, that was conferred upon the
Nephites--not the Aaronic priesthood--and by which they officiated in
sacred things; of things pertaining to the gospel as well as to the
law given of Moses. The justification for administering in the things
of the law by this priesthood consist in the fact that the superior
authority includes all the rights and powers of the inferior authority,
and certainly possesses the power to do what the inferior authority
could do.

It may be claimed that the inconsistency of the Book of Mormon,
relative to this matter, consists in this: It claims that the Nephites
were living according to the law of Moses, and the law of Moses
provided that the house of Aaron and the tribe of Levi alone should
exercise the priesthood; whereas, among the Nephites others than
the Levites held and exercised the priesthood; technically, that
inconsistency exists, but it is a technicality and is capable of
bearing no such weight of argument as Mr. Campbell puts upon it. In
Lehi's colony there was no representative of the tribe of Levi so far
as known, and hence others had to be chosen to officiate before the
Lord in the priest's office.

That the Lord in making his covenant with the house of Aaron and the
tribe of Levi concerning the priesthood reserved to himself the right
on occasion to appoint others to perform priestly functions, even in
Israel, in Palestine, is evident from the case of Gideon, the fifth
judge in Israel after Moses. Gideon was of the tribe of Manasseh, [9]
and when the Lord would deliver Israel from the oppression of the
Midianites he sent his angel to this man, and though he was not of the
tribe to whom the priesthood had been given by covenant, nevertheless,
the Lord commanded him to build an altar, and he did so, and called
it Jehovah-shalom. He also threw down the altar of Baal and built an
altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offerings, all of which were
priestly functions. [10] Shall these acts be denounced as a violation
of the covenant of the Lord with Aaron and the tribe of Levi? Shall
the angel of the Lord, who commanded Gideon in these priestly things,
be declared a spirit of evil, a violator of God's covenant? Shall
the book of Judges be rejected as a spurious book, and unworthy of
being accepted as part of the scriptures because it relates these
circumstances? In a word, shall we employ against it all the thunder
of Mr. Campbell's criticism of the Book of Mormon? His criticism would
be just as effective against the book of Judges as it is against the
Book of Mormon, but as a matter of fact it would amount to nothing in
either case, since the action of Gideon, and also of Lehi and Nephi,
were of the Lord's appointing, and the Lord had certainly reserved to
himself the right to appoint men other than members of the tribe of
Levi when occasion should require, though he had forbidden "men" to
appoint priests other than from that tribe. This was to avoid confusion
and the bringing into existence rival priesthoods among God's people,
but certainly when the Lord conferred a higher order of priesthood upon
the Nephites, under which they were to operate in the New World, there
was no infringement of the rights of the tribe of Levi. It was no more
a violation of the covenant the Lord made with the tribe of Levi, than
it would be for the Lord to appoint an inhabitant of Mars to that order
of priesthood and give him the right of administration in that distant

The whole objection is captious, and manifests the weakness of the
objections urged against the Book of Mormon, since so great stress must
needs be laid upon this supposed contradiction of the Bible covenant.

In his objections to the Book of Mormon, in addition to those already
noted, Mr. Campbell also lays stress upon the departure of Lehi from
Jerusalem, and also the establishment of a temple and its service in
the New World, as a great violation of God's covenant with Israel. "To
represent God," he says, "as inspiring a devout Jew [Lehi was not a
Jew, by the way, but of the tribe of Manasseh] and a prophet, such as
Lehi and Nephi are represented by Smith, with resolution to forsake
Jerusalem and God's own house, and to depart from the land which God
gave to their fathers so long as they were obedient; and to guide by
miracle and bless by prodigies a good man in forsaking God's covenant
and worship, is so monstrous an error that language fails to afford a
name for it."

One can scarce refrain from characterizing this sort of criticism as
nonsense. Nor does it represent the facts in the case. Lehi was not
forsaking God's covenant nor worship; he was leaving Jerusalem by the
Lord's own commandment at a time when God's judgment was about to
fall and shortly afterwards did fall upon the place, so that it was
no great calamity that was happening to Lehi's righteous colony to be
taken from such a place and brought to the great American continents,
agreeable to the covenants of the Lord with the house of Joseph,
Lehi's ancestor. [11] The establishment of a temple in the New World
was a necessity to this colony, but Mr. Campbell, together with all
who have followed him in this and similar objections, seem determined
to so limit the power of God that they will not allow of him making
provisions to meet such occasions.


_Nephite Knowledge of the "Call of the Gentiles."_

Much stress is laid by Mr Campbell and others upon what Paul says
respecting the "call" of the Gentiles to the grace of the gospel of
Christ, "which in other ages," says Paul, "was not made know unto the
sons of men as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets
by the Spirit: that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the
same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel." [12]

The making this truth known to the world, according to Mr. Campbell's
views of Paul's declaration was reserved to Paul and his fellow
apostles of that dispensation. "But Smith," remarks Mr. Campbell,
"makes his pious hero Nephi 600 years before the Messiah began to
preach, disclose these secrets concerning the calling of the Gentiles,
and blessings flowing through the Messiah to Jews and Gentiles, which
Paul says was hid from ages and generations." [13]

This objection could be disposed of in several ways. First, it could
be held that when Paul, and the other apostles of the old world, spoke
concerning the development of the work of the Lord in that land, they
were limited by their knowledge of the world. They did not speak with
reference to the people inhabiting the American continents who were
unknown to them. For example, when Paul said:

    Be not moved away from the hope of the gospel which ye have heard,
    and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven;
    whereof I Paul am made a minister. [14]

No one for a moment thinks Paul had in mind the inhabitants of the
western hemisphere when he said, "the Gospel was preached to every
creature which is under heaven." He had reference to the world with
which he was acquainted, as he knew the world.

Second, it could be held that the knowledge of this mystery revealed to
the Nephites by no means interfered with the purposes of God in keeping
that matter hidden from the Gentiles and the world. The fact made known
to the Nephites never reached the Gentiles until after the publication
of the Book of Mormon, in 1830, long ages after Paul had published the
fact to the Gentile world. What was revealed to the Nephites in no way
detracted from the glory of Paul and the other apostles, making known
the mystery of God's grace to the Gentiles.

Third. It could be held that Paul meant that himself and fellow
apostles knew in a different way that the Gentiles were to be fellow
heirs with the house of Israel in the privileges of the gospel. Indeed,
I think this must be the solution of the matter, for Mr. Campbell's
version of it would bring Paul and Isaiah into pronounced conflict
with each other, and prove that one or the other of them did not speak
by the inspiration of God. That it was revealed to the ancients that
the Gentiles were to partake of the advantages of Christ's atonement,
and have part in the salvation that is possible though it is evident
from the following passages, which all allow makes direct reference to
Christ and his mission.

    I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine
    hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the
    people, for a light of the Gentiles. [15]


    And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant
    to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of
    Israel; I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that
    thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth. [16]

In the light of these revelations, concerning the part the Gentiles
were to have in the salvation that comes through Christ, it can
scarcely be said that this "mystery," was not revealed in ages previous
to the days of Paul; but it could be said, and this I contend is what
Paul meant, that it was not as fully known in former ages that the
Gentiles were "to be fellow heirs and of the same body, and partakers
of his promise in Christ by the gospel." Before Paul's time it was only
in prophecy that this was known; but after his day it was known both in
prophecy and as accomplished fact.


_The Difficulty of the Three Days Darkness_.

An effort is sometimes made to bring the Book of Mormon into
contradiction with the New Testament in the matter of "three days
darkness," connected with the death of Jesus. The objection was
recently stated in these terms:

    In Helaman xiv: 20-27, and in I. Nephi xix: 10, we read about three
    days of darkness which should cover "all the earth," and the isles
    of the sea at the crucifixion of the Savior. Neither the Bible nor
    history speaks of three days of darkness on the eastern hemisphere,
    hence it did not cover "all the earth" as we understand it.

The objection as here stated, and the argument to be inferred from it,
is: the Book of Mormon says that at the crucifixion of Messiah there
will be three days of darkness that will cover all the face of the
earth and the isles of the sea. History and the Bible are silent about
such an event; therefore, the Book of Mormon makes a false statement
and must itself be untrue, and consequently uninspired, and is not at
all what it claims to be, viz., a record of the ancient inhabitants of
America, and brought forth by the power of God for the enlightenment
and instruction of the world.

This statement of the objection differs a little from the ordinary
manner in which the objection is made. Objectors usually try to make
it appear that the Book of Mormon's statement that there were three
days darkness in the Western World during the time Messiah was in the
tomb is in conflict with the New Testament's statement that there were
three hours darkness during the crucifixion; but the fact that the New
Testament refers to an event that took place while Jesus hung upon the
cross in Judea, and the Book of Mormon statement refers to an event
that took place after his crucifixion, while he was lying in the tomb,
and in the western hemisphere, instead of at Jerusalem, it must be
apparent that there is no conflict between the two accounts.

But now to meet the objection as here presented. All that is necessary
will be to present just exactly what the Book of Mormon does say with
reference to the three days of darkness:

    The God of our fathers * * * * yieldeth himself, according to the
    words of the angel, as a man into the hands of wicked men to be
    lifted up according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified
    according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre,
    according to the words of Zenos, which he spake, concerning the
    three days of darkness which should be a sign given of his death,
    unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially
    given unto those who are of the House of Israel. [17]

This is one of the passages referred to in the objection, but there
is nothing here about the three days of darkness extending over "the
whole face of the earth." It speaks of it as extending to the isles
of the sea; i. e. to lands distant from Jerusalem beyond the seas--to
those more especially inhabited by the house of Israel. In passing, and
merely by the way, it may be interesting to call attention to the fact
that here are three Hebrew prophets referred to by Nephi--Zenock, Neum,
and Zenos--each of whom had recorded an important prophecy respecting
the coming and mission of Christ; and had not the Jews eliminated the
books of these prophets from their collection of scriptures, it could
not have then been said, as it is now said, that the Bible is silent
respecting these three days of darkness, which were to be a sign of the
Messiah's death; for then they would have had the words of Zenos that
there was to be such a sign given in the isles of the sea, inhabited by
the house of Israel.

    Behold, as I said unto you concerning another sign, a sign of his
    death, behold in that day that he shall suffer death, the sun shall
    be darkened and refuse to give his light unto you, and also the
    moon, and the stars also; and there shall be no light upon the
    face of this land, even from the time that he shall suffer death,
    for the space of three days, to the time that he shall rise again
    from the dead. * * * And behold thus hath the angel * * said unto
    me, that these things should be, and that darkness shall cover the
    face of the whole earth for the space of three days. And the angel
    said unto me, that many shall see greater things than these, to the
    intent that they might believe that these signs and these wonders
    come to pass upon all the face of this land. (Helaman, 20:28.)

This is the other passage quoted, and in it is found the phrase, "that
darkness shall cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three
days." But it should be remembered that this is preceded by a statement
concerning the three days darkness that limits this otherwise general
statement, namely, "and there shall be no light upon the face of this
land"--meaning America--"for the space of three days." This clearly
limits the particular sign under consideration to America and the
adjacent islands of the sea, in other words, to the western hemisphere.
Moreover, the phrase, "that darkness shall cover the face of the whole
earth," is followed as well as preceded by the limiting clause--"these
signs and these wonders"--namely, the three hours of tempest and of
earthquake followed by the three days of darkness--"shall come to pass
upon all the face of this land"--meaning of course, America.

Then again, when the prophecy is left and you turn to the history
of its fulfillment, the whole of the thrilling narrative is clearly
confined to the statement of events that occurred in the lands occupied
by the Nephites--that is, to the western hemisphere. Yet in that
narrative is found the same form of expression as in the prophecy of
Samuel, the Lamanite. While describing events that are clearly confined
to Nephite lands, Mormon says: "and thus the face of the whole earth
became deformed because of the tempests and the thunderings and the
lightnings. * * * And behold the rocks were rent in twain; they were
broken up upon all the face of the whole earth."--(III. Nephi, 8:
17, 18). Now did the prophet really mean that the convulsions he was
describing extended to Europe and Asia and Africa because he said "the
rocks were broken upon the face of the whole earth?" No; you limit the
general expression here by the facts of the whole circumstance under
consideration, so that "broken up upon the face of the whole earth,"
means upon the face of the whole earth so far as the Nephite lands are
concerned--that is the limitation of the general phrase.

As an example of this kind of interpretation, I introduce a passage or
two from the Bible. Daniel, in giving the interpretation of the king of
Babylon's dream, says:

    Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given
    thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the
    children of men dwell the beasts of the field and the fowls of the
    heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over
    them all. Thou art this head of gold.

Does this prophecy really mean "wheresoever the children of men dwell,"
there, too, was the rule and dominion of Nebuchadnezzar? Did he rule
all of Europe and Africa? Did his dominion extend to the western
hemisphere, for there the children of men dwelt as well as in Asia?
It is a matter of common information that Nebuchadnezzar's dominion
was not thus extended, but really was quite limited. What, then? Shall
we reject the prophecies of Daniel because a strict and technical
construction of his language does not meet the facts?

Again he says, speaking of the political powers that would succeed

    And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and
    another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the

This third kingdom is generally agreed to have reference to the kingdom
of Alexander; but did Alexander "bear rule over all the earth?" Did
he bear rule over the western hemisphere? No; nor did he know of its
existence. What, then, shall we do with this inspired prophet who
says he "shall bear rule over all the earth?" Shall we reject him and
his book? Or say that his statements do not agree with the facts?
That would be absurd. The particular phrase is limited by the general
circumstances under which the prophet was speaking. That is of course
taken by all who believe the book of Daniel, and it is a course amply
justified by reason.

Again, it is recorded in Luke, speaking of the events which happened
during the crucifixion of the Savior:

    And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all
    the earth until the ninth hour.

Did this inspired writer really have in mind the whole round earth, or
was he speaking with reference to what happened right there in Judea
where the main event occurred? Undoubtedly he had reference to what
had been stated to him by the eye witnesses of the scene, who merely
related what appeared to them; namely, that a darkness settled down
over the land, but they were not thinking of the face of the whole
earth when they told the story to Luke, nor was he when he wrote his
statement of the event.

One other example:

    Be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard,
    and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven;
    whereof I Paul am made a minister. (Col. i: 23.)

Is this statement of Paul's literally true? Had the gospel at that
time, or, for matter of that, has it at any time since then, been
preached unto every creature under heaven? Certainly not. And when Paul
wrote his letter to the Colossians there were millions of the children
of men, as there are to this day, who never had heard of Messiah or
the gospel. Paul could only have meant by this over-statement of the
matter, that the gospel had been generally preached in the kingdoms and
provinces with which himself and the Colossians were acquainted; and
no one thinks of rejecting Paul or his books because of such seeming
inaccuracies. His use of such broad-sweeping phrases are interpreted
in the light of reason, and limited by the well known circumstances
under which he wrote. It should be remembered in this connection,
that hyperbole is a habit of speech with oriental peoples, to whom
the Jews belonged; and indirectly, too, the Nephites are descendents
of the same people, and have retained to a large extent the same
habits of expression; all of which should be taken into account in the
interpretation of the Nephite records as it always is in exegeses of
the Hebrew scriptures.


_The Birth of Jesus "at Jerusalem."_

The following prediction concerning the birth place of Jesus is found
in the book of Alma.

    And behold he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem, which is the
    land of our forefathers.

Jesus, it is well known, was born at Bethlehem, Judea, between four
and five miles south of Jerusalem, really a suburb of the larger city.
Nearly all objectors point to this prophecy as being in contradiction
of the well attested historical fact of Christ's birth at Bethlehem.
The objection is seldom fairly stated. It is charged that the Book of
Mormon says that Jesus was born "at Jerusalem," and Alexander Campbell
quotes it as being "in Jerusalem," and all omit the qualifying clause
"the land of our fathers," which clearly indicates that it is not the
"city" which the Nephite historian gives, but the "land" in which Jesus
would be born.

This explanation of the supposed difficulty is further strengthened
when it is remembered that it was a custom of the Nephites to name
large districts of country--such as might correspond to provinces and
principalities in other nations--after the chief city of the land:

    Now it was the custom of the people of Nephi, to call their lands,
    and their cities, and their villages, yea, even all their small
    villages, after the name of him who first possessed them; and thus
    it was with the land of Ammonihah. [18]

And hence, too, came the practice of calling large districts of country
after the chief city therein. In this same book of Alma--as throughout
the Book of Mormon--we have the city named after the man who founded
it, and the district of country named from the chief city, thus: "The
Land of Zarahemla," "the land of Melek;" "the land of Ammonihah;" "the
land of Gideon;" "the land of Lehi-Nephi, or the city of Lehi-Nephi;"
and so on ad infinitum. It became a habit of speech with them,
especially with reference to Jerusalem, whence their forefathers came,
as witness the following few out of many such quotations that could be

    I shall give this people a name, that thereby they may be
    distinguished above all the people which the Lord God hath brought
    out of the land of Jerusalem. (Mosiah 1: 11.)

    That same God has brought our fathers out of the land of
    Jerusalem. (Mosiah 7: 20.)

    Why will he not show himself in this land, as well as in the land
    of Jerusalem? (Helaman 16: 19).

Hence when it is said that Jesus should be born "at Jerusalem, which is
the land of our forefathers," the Nephite writer merely conformed to a
habit of speech, and meant the "land" of Jerusalem, not the "city."


_The Settlement of Modern Controversies_.

    This prophet Smith * * * * wrote on the plates of Nephi, in his
    Book of Mormon, every error and almost every truth discussed
    in New York for the last ten years. He decides all the great
    controversies;--infant baptism, ordination, the trinity,
    regeneration, repentance, justification, the fall of man, the
    atonement, transubstantiation, fasting, penance, church government,
    religious experience, the call to the ministry and general
    resurrection, eternal punishment, who may baptize, and even the
    question of free masonry, republican government, and the rights of
    man. All these topics are repeatedly alluded to.

Then in mockery:

    How much more benevolent and intelligent this American Apostle
    than the Holy Twelve and Paul to assist them! He prophesied of all
    these topics, and of the apostasy, and infallibly decides by his
    authority every question. How easy to prophecy of the past or of
    the present time!

Such the statement of Alexander Campbell in the criticism so often
quoted in these pages. Some critics of the Book of Mormon have charged
that it contained nothing of importance on such matters; [19] nothing
that was really worth while considering, but if it considers this long
list of subjects enumerated by Mr. Campbell, the charge of not dealing
with questions of importance must surely be set aside. As a matter of
fact, the Book of Mormon deals with at least the most of the subjects
enumerated, not, however, as they were discussed in New York between
1820 and 1830, but as they arose in the experience of the ancient
inhabitants of America, or as the Nephite prophets moved upon by the
Holy Spirit saw what would arise within the experience of the Gentiles
who would inhabit the land. The chief complaint against Mr. Campbell's
objection on these points consist in the spirit in which he makes it.
For example, the Book of Mormon says nothing of "free masonry," but
throughout the work it does discuss the question of secret societies
that existed both among the Jaredites and Nephites, which societies
were factors in bringing about the overthrow of both these nations; and
it contains also prophetic warning to the Gentiles against such secret

If in the treatment of theological questions and difficulties
enumerated by Mr. Campbell there appears in the Book of Mormon the
same difficulties that have agitated the eastern world, it must be
remembered that the source of error is the same--the limitation of
human knowledge, reason and judgment; the ever present inclination in
man to follow after his own devices; and that the same tempter to evil
operated in the western hemisphere as in the eastern hemisphere, and
evidently has reproduced the same theological difficulties and led men
into the same errors.

Take for example the matter of infant baptism, which Mr. Campbell says
the Book of Mormon settles, and indeed it does, by most emphatically
pointing out the error and wickedness of it when the doctrine is made
to teach the salvation of one innocent child because it is baptized,
and the eternal damnation of another innocent child because it was
not baptized; [20] but the Book of Mormon condemnation of that wicked
doctrine was not recorded in its pages because of any controversy
existing on the subject in New York, as Mr. Campbell pretends, but
because the Nephite prophets were aroused against this doctrine by
reason of their people running into the same error--the doctrine of
eternal damnation of unbaptized infants--which burdened the teachings
of so called Christian Churches. The proof of this statement is in the
fact that the native Americans at the time of the Spanish invasion
of their country were practicing infant baptism. The fact is related
by all the authorities, varying slightly in their description of it,
according as they get the tradition from this, that, or the other
section of the country. Perhaps, however, Sahagun's description is the
most minute and covers the subject more completely than any other of
the writers, and hence I give at length the passage on the subject as
quoted by Prescott in his appendix to the "Conquest of Mexico."

    When every thing necessary for the baptism had been made ready, all
    the relations of the child were assembled, and the midwife, who
    was the person that performed the rite of baptism, was summoned.
    At early dawn they met together in the court-yard of the house.
    When the sun had arisen, the midwife, taking the child in her arms,
    called for a little earthen vessel of water, while those about her
    placed the ornaments which had been prepared for the baptism in
    the midst of the court. To perform the rite of baptism, she placed
    herself with her face towards the west, and immediately began to
    go through certain ceremonies. * * * * After this she sprinkled
    water on the head of the infant, saying, "O, my child! take and
    receive the water of the Lord of the world, which is our life, and
    is given for the increasing and renewing of our body. It is to wash
    and purify. I pray that these heavenly drops may enter into your
    body, and dwell there; that they may destroy and remove from you
    all the evil and sin which was given to you before the beginning
    of the world; since all of us are under its power, being all the
    children of Chalchivitlycue" (the goddess of water), She then
    washed the body of the child with water, and spoke in this manner:
    "whencesoever thou comest, thou that are hurtful to this child;
    leave him and depart from him, for he now liveth anew, and is
    born anew; now he is purified and cleansed afresh, and our mother
    Chalchivitycue again bringeth him into the world." Having thus
    prayed, the midwife took the child in both hands, and, lifting him
    towards heaven, said, "O Lord, thou seest here thy creature, whom
    thou hast sent into this world, this place of sorrow, suffering,
    and penitence. Grant him, O Lord, thy gifts, and thine inspiration,
    for thou art the Great God, and with thee is the great goddess."
    Torches of pine were kept burning during the performance of these
    ceremonies. When these things were ended, they gave the child the
    name of some one of his ancestors, in the hope that he might shed
    a new lustre over it. The name was given by the same midwife, or
    priestess, who baptized him.

This is a perverted form of baptism preserved in the customs of the
native Americans. The Nephites, in the days of Mormon--and how much
before that is not known--fell into this error of infant baptism and
were evidently teaching the damnation of those infants who did not
receive that ordinance. When young Moroni was called to the ministry,
his father, Mormon, charged him strictly against this error and
sharply proclaimed against the iniquity of it. Yet it seems to have
persisted in the customs of the native Americans until we see it in
the form represented by Sahagun, though of course it may have received
modifications--such for instance as being administered by women--since
the period with which the Book of Mormon closes.

It is in this manner that the Book of Mormon settles the question
of infant baptism, not, as Mr. Campbell insinuates, viz., that the
question of infant baptism being under discussion in western New York
Joseph Smith inserted a decision on the controversy in the Book of

Further in relation to this matter of baptism in the Book of Mormon,
it does settle the question of the manner of baptism through the
instructions which Jesus is represented as giving to the Nephites--and
was there a subject in relation to the gospel on which Christians
needed instructions more than upon this? And now Jesus to the Nephites:

    Verily I say unto you, that whoso repenteth of his sins through
    your words, and desireth to be baptized in my name, on this wise
    shall ye baptize them; behold, ye shall go down and stand in the
    water, and in my name ye shall baptize them. And now behold; these
    are the words which ye shall say, calling them by name, saying.
    "Having authority given me of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the
    name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen."
    And then shall ye immerse them in the water and come forth again
    out of the water.

There can be no doubt as to the manner of Christian baptism after these
instructions from the Master, by those who accept the Book of Mormon
as an authority. How much wrangling and idle disputation would have
been saved the Christian world if something as definite as this had
been found in the Christian annals of the eastern world! In passing,
and in proof of the divinity of this ceremonial, I call attention to
the simplicity and yet comprehensiveness of it; to the directness of
it. Place the simplicity and directness of this formula of baptism
in contrast with Sahagun's description of baptism among the native
Americans, or contrast it with the same ceremony as practiced among
the paganized Christians of the old world, [21] and the simplicity and
dignity of the ordinance as given by the Savior to the Nephites will
not only appear, but will strongly plead for its divine origin.

I also call attention to the settlement of what Mr. Campbell calls
"transubstantiation," this is, to the Christian memorial known as the
Lord's supper, about which gathers some of the most vexed questions of
Christian controversy. For the manner in which this simple memorial of
Christ's atonement was changed to what was considered a magnificent
spiritual, yet real sacrifice, the reader is referred to what is said
in volume I of the New Witness, chapter v. Here I only wish to call
attention to the simple beauty and comprehensiveness of the prayer
which consecrated the emblems of the body and blood of Christ, found in
the Book of Mormon. Trusting to the presence of qualities of simplicity
and appropriateness to establish the divine origin of said formula,
which result, if accomplished by the citation, will tend also to prove
the general claims of the Book of Mormon.

Now the prayer of consecration:

    O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son Jesus
    Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those
    who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of
    thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that
    they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always
    remember him, and keep his commandments which he hath given them,
    that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.

"The manner of administering the wine. Behold, they took the cup, and

    O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee, in the name of thy Son
    Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all
    those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the
    blood of thy Son, which was shed for them, that they may witness
    unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember
    him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.

Of this formula I have already said what Archdeacon Paley has said of
the Lord's prayer, when appealing to its excellence as evidence of its
divine origin--"For a succession of solemn thoughts, for fixing the
attention on a few great points, for suitableness, for sufficiency,
for conciseness without obscurity, for the weight and real importance
of its petitions, this prayer is without an equal." Its composition
in excellence arises far above any performance that Joseph Smith
could be considered equal to, and, in a word, carries within itself
the evidence of a divine authorship. Such passages as these need no
argument in support of their divine origin. We may trust entirely to
the self-evidence which breathes through every sentence. A Campbell's
mockery against such passages amounts to nothing.


_The Book Contains Nothing New_.

Relative to the objections urged against the Book of Mormon that it
reveals nothing new, that it adds nothing to our Christian treasury of
knowledge, in other words, the charge that it contains no revelation--I
refer for answer to all that, to what I have said concerning the
knowledge which the Book of Mormon imparts on so many great and
important subjects in chapters xxxix and xl.

Moreover, objections based upon this plea that the Book of Mormon
reveals no new moral or religious truth, is a position not well taken
by Christians at least. It must be conceded that the things which
Christians would be compelled to allow as the important things for men
to know--the existence of God the Father; the relationship of Jesus
Christ to him, and the latter's relationship to men in effecting their
redemption; the means by which that redemption is achieved; the final
coming and universal reign of God's kingdom on earth, etc.,--all these
important truths are repeated in Christ's ministry among the Nephites.

When Messiah came to the new world he had the same announcement to make
concerning himself and his relations to the world, the same ethical
and spiritual doctrines to teach; and as he had been accustomed to
state these doctrines in brief, aphoristic sentences while in Judea,
it is not strange that the same things were given to the Nephites in
their language much in the same form. In a word, he not only had the
same revelation to make to the inhabitants in the western hemisphere
as to those in the eastern hemisphere, the same religion to teach, and
therefore, as I have already remarked, it is sameness of doctrine,
identity of construction, that should be looked for rather than
something new in religion and ethics.

I would also remind the Christian reader of the fact that this same
alleged want of originality, this alleged lacking of that which is new,
is charged against the Lord Jesus Christ both by infidels and Jews.
They demand to know what moral and religious truth Jesus taught the
world that was not already taught by Buddha and the Jewish Rabbis. Not
only is it claimed that Christ's moral truths were borrowed from more
ancient teachers, but that the principle events of his life, also, from
his birth of a virgin to his crucifixion and resurrection as a God,
were stolen from myths concerning old world heroes and teachers.

One writer devotes a volume to the subject in which he traces in
the heathen mythologies sixteen crucified Saviors; the traditions
concerning whom more or less bear some resemblance to chief events in
the life of Messiah.

Perhaps one of the most elaborate and carefully prepared comparisons
of the teachings of the Messiah as recorded in the New Testament, and
the Rabbis in the Talmud appear in "The Open Court" for October, 1903,
(Vol. 17). Of the long parallel I can only give samples:

  New Testament.                              Talmud.
                                      "More acceptable to the
  "Blessed are the poor in spirit".   Lord than sacrifice is the humble

                                      "Let this be thy short form
  "Thy kingdom come. Thy              of prayer: Thy will be done
  will be done on earth as it is in   in heaven, and may peace of
  heaven."                            heart be the reward of them
                                      that reverence thee on earth."

  "Lead us not into temptation,       "Lead me not into sin, even
  but deliver us from evil."          from its temptations deliver
                                      thou me."

  "For with what judgment ye          "Whoso judges his neighbor
  judge, ye shall be judged."         charitably, shall himself be
                                      charitably judged."

  "How wilt thou say to thy           "Do they say: Take the
  brother, let me pull out the        splinter out of thine eye? He
  mote out of thine eye; and behold   will answer: Remove the beam
  a beam is in thine own              out of thine own eye."

  "All things whatsoever ye
  would that men should do to         "What is hateful unto thee,
  you, do you even so to them,        that do not unto another. This
  for this is the Law and the         is the whole Law, all the rest
  Prophets."                          is commentary."

  "Freely ye have received,           "As freely as God has taught
  freely give."                       you, so freely shall ye teach."

  "The Sabbath was made for           "The Sabbath has been delivered
  man, not man for the Sabbath."      into your power, not
                                      you into the power of the Sabbath."

  "It is enough for the disciple      "It is enough for the servant
  that he be as his master."          that he be as his master."

A parallel somewhat similar, though neither so closely identical nor
so extended, can be drawn between the teachings of Buddha and Christ,
which any one may verify for himself by consulting Max Muller's lecture
on _Dhammapada_, or The Path of Virtue. [22]

To a limited extent, also, a similar parallel might be drawn between
the teachings of Christ and Confucius, and even of other moral
philosophers. To illustrate what I mean, take the "Golden Rule," for so
long, and even now, by a great many people, regarded as an exclusively
Christian utterance, and you will find the substance of it in the
utterance of many teachers before the time of Christ:

    1. Golden Rule by Confucius, 500 B. C.

    "Do unto another what you would have him do unto you, and do not to
    another what you would not have him do unto you. Thou needest this
    law alone. It is the foundation of all the rest."

    2. Golden Rule by Aristotle, 385 B. C.

    "We should conduct ourselves toward others as we would have them
    act toward us."

    3. Golden Rule by Pittacus, 650 B. C.

    "Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him."

    4. Golden Rule by Thales, 464 B. C.

    "Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing."

    5. Golden Rule by Isocrates, 338 B. C.

    "Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you."

    6. Golden Rule by Aristippus, 365 B. C.

    "Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for
    another's welfare as your own."

    7. Golden Rule by Sextus, a Pithagorean, 406 B. C.

    "What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them."

    8. Golden Rule by Hillel, 50 B. C.

    "Do not to others what you would not like others to do to you." [23]

Though perhaps not properly belonging to my treatment of this objection
to the Book of Mormon, I may say in passing--and to keep those who
read these pages in the presence of the full truth--I may say that
the presence of ethical and religious truths, in what we call heathen
mythology, is easily accounted for. The gospel was taught in very
ancient times, in fact from the beginning--a dispensation of it was
given to Adam--and although men departed from it in large measure
as a system of truth, still fragments of it were preserved in the
mythologies of all people. So that as a matter of fact Christianity, as
taught by Jesus, derived nothing from heathen mythology, but heathen
mythologies were made rich by fragmentary truths from the early
dispensations of the gospel of Jesus Christ.


_Modern Astronomy in the Book_.

From a remark of the younger Alma's (first century B. C.), and from one
of Mormon's (fourth century A. D.), it is evident that the Nephites had
knowledge of the movement of the earth and of the planets. Alma, in his
remark, appeals to the earth's motion, "yea, and also of the planets
which move in their regular form," as being evidence of the existence
of the Creator. [24]

Mormon's remark comes in course of some reflections of his upon the
power of God, when abridging the Book of Helaman, in which he says:

    Yea, and if he say unto the earth, move, it is moved; yea, if he
    say unto the earth, thou shalt go back, that it lengthen out the
    day for many hours, it is done; and thus according to his word, the
    earth goeth back, and it appeareth unto man that the sun standeth
    still; yea, and behold, this is so; for sure it is the earth that
    moveth, and not the sun. [25]

Both these passages are referred to by Lamb [26] as evidence of the Book
of Mormon being modern, and the second passage he sarcastically refers
to as "a modern scientist attempting to explain Joshua's miracle;" to
which I might say: Why not an ancient Nephite's explanation of Joshua's
miracle, since the Nephites were acquainted with that same miracle,
having with them the book of Joshua with other Hebrew scriptures?
Moreover, the knowledge of the movement of the earth and of the planets
is not modern knowledge. It is quite generally conceded that the
ancients had the knowledge of these facts, and that the discoveries
by Copernicus, Kepler and others are but a revival or restoration of
ancient knowledge concerning the movement of the earth and planetary
system. [27]

The Holy Inquisition in passing sentence on Galileo took ocassion
to say something of the Copernican system, teaching which was the
philosopher's offense, and denounced it as "that false Pythagorean
doctrine utterly contrary to the Holy Scriptures." ("Intellectual
Development of Europe," Draper, Vol. II., p. 263).

Again: Because the inhabitants of the eastern hemisphere were fallen
into ignorance concerning the facts of astronomy, it does not
necessarily follow that the inhabitants of the western hemisphere were
without correct knowledge on that subject. Indeed, the authorities on
American antiquities agree that the ancient native Americans were well
advanced in knowledge on that subject. Priest, for instance, has the
following passage on the subject:

    As it respects the scientific acquirements of the builders of the
    works in the west, now in ruins, [the mounds], Mr. Atwater, says,
    "when thoroughly examined, have furnished matter of admiration to
    all intelligent persons who have attended to the subject. Nearly
    all the lines of ancient works found in the whole country, where
    the form of the ground admits of it, are right ones, pointing
    to the four cardinal points. Where there are mounds enclosed,
    the gateways are most frequently on the east side of the works,
    towards the rising sun. Where the situation admits of it, in their
    military works, the openings are generally towards one or more of
    the cardinal points. From which it is supposed they must have had
    some knowledge of astronomy, or their structures would not, it is
    imagined, have been thus arranged. From these circumstances also,
    we draw the conclusion that the first inhabitants of America,
    emigrated from Asia, at a period coeval with that of Babylon, for
    there it was that astronomical calculations were first made, 2,234
    years before Christ." [28]

"These things could never have so happened, with such invariable
exactness, in almost all cases, without design. 'On the whole.' says
Atwater, 'I am convinced from an attention to many hundreds of these
works, in every part of the west which I have visited, that their
authors had a knowledge of astronomy.'"

Baldwin has the following passage on what he regards as a telescopic
device, discovered in an ancient mound:

    Mr. Schoolcraft gives this account of a discovery made in West
    Virginia: "Antique tube: telescopic device. In the course of
    excavations made in 1842 in the eastern-most of the three mounds
    of the Elizabethtown group, several tubes of stone were disclosed,
    the precise object of which has been the subject of various
    opinions. The longest measured twelve inches, the shortest eight.
    Three of them were carved out of steatite, being skilfully cut and
    polished. The diameter of the tube externally was one inch and
    four tenths; the bore, eight tenths of an inch. This calibre was
    continued till within three eighths of an inch of the sight end,
    when it diminishes to two tenths of an inch. By placing the eye
    at the diminished end, the extraneous light is shut out from the
    pupil, and distant objects are more clearly discerned.' He points
    out that the carving and workmanship generally are very superior
    to Indian pipe carvings, and adds, if this article was a work of
    the Mound-Builders, 'intended for a telescopic tube, it is a most
    interesting relic.' An ancient Peruvian relic, found a few years
    since, shows the figure of a man wrought in silver, in the act of
    studying the heavens through such a tube. Similar tubes have been
    found among relics of the Mound-Builders in Ohio and elsewhere. In
    Mexico, Captain Dupaix saw sculptured on a peculiar stone structure
    the figure of a man making use of one. Astronomical devices were
    sculptured below the figure. This structure he supposed to have
    been used for observation of the stars." [29]

Later, referring to the Dupaix Mexican observatory, Baldwin says:

    "In this part of Mexico Captain Dupaix examined a peculiar ruin,
    of which he gave the following account: "Near the road from the
    village of Tlalmanalco to that called Mecamecan, about three miles
    east of the latter, there is an isolated granite rock, which was
    artificially formed into a kind of pyramid with six hewn steps
    facing the east. The summit of this structure is a platform, or
    horizontal plane, well adapted to observation of the stars on
    every side of the hemisphere. It is almost demonstratable that
    this very ancient monument was exclusively devoted to astronomical
    observations, for on the south side of the rock are sculptured
    several hieroglyphical figures having relation to astronomy. The
    most striking figure in the group is that of a man in profile,
    standing erect, and directing his view to the rising stars in
    the sky. He holds to his eye a tube or optical instrument. Below
    his feet is a frieze divided into six compartments, with as many
    celestial signs carved on its surface." It has been already stated
    that finely-wrought "telescopic tubes" have been found among
    remains of the Mound-Builders. They were used, it seems, by the
    ancient people of Mexico and Central America, and they were known
    also in ancient Peru, where a silver figure of a man in the act of
    using such a tube has been discovered in one of the old tombs. [30]

Even Prescott, who is inclined to be sceptical of the statements made
concerning astronomical instruments among the Aztecs, and ridicules
Dupaix's assertion of the existence of an astronomical observatory,
nevertheless says:

    We know little further of the astronomical attainments of the
    Aztecs. That they were acquainted with the cause of eclipses is
    evident from the representation, on their maps, of the disk of the
    moon projecting on that of the sun. Whether they had arranged a
    system of constellations is uncertain; though, that they recognized
    some of the most obvious, as the Pleiades, for example, is evident
    from the fact that they regulated their festivals by them. [31]

Nadaillac, always conservative concerning the civilization and
knowledge of the native Americans, on this point says:

    The various races which occupied Central America had some knowledge
    of astronomy. They were acquainted with divisions of time founded
    on the motion of the sun, and long before the conquest they
    possessed a regular system. [32]

Bancroft, on the same subject, remarks:

    Perhaps the strongest proof of the advanced civilization of the
    Nahuas was their method of computing time, which, for ingenuity and
    correctness, equaled, if it did not surpass, the systems adopted
    by contemporaneous European and Asiatic nations. The Nahuas were
    well acquainted with the movements of the sun and moon, and even of
    some of the planets, while celestial phenomena, such as eclipses,
    although attributed to unnatural causes, were nevertheless
    carefully observed and recorded. They had, moreover, an accurate
    system of dividing the day into fixed periods, corresponding
    somewhat to our hours; indeed, as the learned Sr. Leony Gama has
    shown, the Aztec calendar-stone which was found in the plaza of the
    city of Mexico, was used not only as a durable register, but also
    as a sundial. [33]


_The Geography of the Book_.

It is objected to the Book of Mormon that it lacks "local coloring" and
definiteness in respect of its geography; and it is usually contrasted
to its disadvantage with the Bible in this respect. "I have not been
able to find an edition of the Book of Mormon with maps in it," says
one objector, "nor have I been able to find with perfect surety the
location of the land in which Christ is supposed to have appeared to
the Nephites." [34]

"We find almost nothing," continues Dr. Paden, "which would fit with
the tropical climate; in fact, the general description would better
coincide with Pennsylvania or New York." [35] "The grandest mountains in
the world, and the highest table lands," says another objector, "are
as entirely ignored as is the general shape of the two continents and
other physical facts. While the physical characteristics of Palestine
are woven as a web into almost every page of Bible history, the
Book of Mormon is unable to appeal to a single geographical fact in
confirmation of its pretended histories, except the general one that
there was a 'land south' and a 'land north.'" [36]

This is an exaggerated statement of the supposed difficulty, and so
also is it an exaggerated statement concerning the geography of the
Bible. Suppose, for instance, you separate the Book of Isaiah from
the rest of the library of books comprising the Bible, and how much
of a figure does geography cut in that book? The same may be said of
the book of Psalms, the book of Proverbs, and, separating the preface
from it, the same could be said of the book of Deuteronomy. Mistakes
in criticism of the Book of Mormon are continually made through
entertaining the idea that the Book of Mormon in its structure is the
same as the Bible; that it is the translation of a people's original
literature, and that the books of Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, etc., are the
books written by the men bearing those names. Whereas, what we have
is but Mormon's abridgment of the writings of those men. The Book of
Mormon, in other words, save for the writings of Nephi and Jacob (149
pages), and seven other writers [37]--whose entries upon the small
plates of Nephi make but about eight pages--is an abridged record
throughout. Historical events, doctrines, prophecies, not geographical
descriptions, the location of cities, the course of rivers, the
grandeur of mountains or the extent of valleys, will be the objective
of Mormon's research through the larger Nephite records. I may say,
therefore, in answer to this criticism of the Book of Mormon, while by
no means granting all that is claimed in respect of its geographical
defects--its imperfections in geography arise from the very nature
of the book's construction. In such a work you do not look for
geographical knowledge.

I may say also that as these pages go to press the question of Book
of Mormon geography is more than ever recognized as an open one by
students of the book. That is to say, it is a question if Mormon views
hitherto entertained respecting Book of Mormon lands have not been a
misconception by reason of premises forced upon its students by the
declaration of an alleged revelation. In a compendium of doctrinal
subjects, published by the late Elders Franklin D. Richards and James
A. Little, the following item appears:

    _Lehi's Travels.--Revelation to Joseph the Seer:_ The course that
    Lehi and his company traveled from Jerusalem to the place of their
    destination: They traveled nearly a south, southeast direction
    until they came to the nineteenth degree of north latitude; then,
    nearly east of the Sea of Arabia, then sailed in a southeast
    direction, and landed on the continent of South America, in Chili,
    thirty degrees south latitude. [38]

The only reason so far discovered for regarding the above as a
revelation is that it is found written on a loose sheet of paper in the
hand writing of Frederick G. Williams, for some years second Counselor
in the First Presidency of the Church in the Kirtland period of its
history; and follows the body of the revelation contained in Doctrine
and Covenants, Section vii., relating to John the beloved disciple,
remaining on earth, until the glorious coming of Jesus to reign with
his Saints. The hand-writing is certified to be that of Frederick G.
Williams, by his son, Ezra G. Williams, of Ogden; and endorsed on
the back of the sheet of paper containing the above passage and the
revelation pertaining to John. The indorsement is dated April the 11th,
1864. The revelation pertaining to John has this introductory line:
"_A Revelation Concerning John, the Beloved Disciple_." But there is no
heading to the passage relating to the passage about Lehi's travels.
The words "Lehi's Travels;" and the words "Revelation to Joseph the
Seer," are added by the publishers, justified as they supposed,
doubtless, by the fact that the paragraph is in the hand writing of
Frederick G. Williams, Counselor to the Prophet, and on the same
page with the body of an undoubted revelation, which was published
repeatedly as such in the life time of the Prophet, first in 1833, at
Independence, Missouri, in the "Book of Commandments," and subsequently
in every edition of the Doctrine and Covenants until now. But the one
relating to Lehi's travels was never published in the life-time of
the Prophet, and was published no where else until published in the
Richards-Little's Compendium as noted above. Now, if no more evidence
can be found to establish this passage in Richards and Little's
Compendium as a "revelation to Joseph, the Seer," than the fact that it
is found in the hand writing of Frederick G. Williams, and on the same
sheet of paper with the body of the revelation about John, the beloved
disciple, the evidence of its being a "revelation to Joseph, the Seer,"
rests on a very unsatisfactory basis.

Yet this alleged "revelation" has dominated all our thinking, and
influenced all our conclusions upon the subject of Book of Mormon
geography. Whereas, if this is not a revelation, the physical
description relative to the contour of the lands occupied by the
Jaredites and Nephites, that being principally that two large bodies
of land were joined by a narrow neck of land--can be found between
Mexico and Yucatan with the isthmus of Tehuantepec between. If the
investigation now going on shall result in relieving us of the
necessity of considering ourselves bound to uphold as a revelation the
passage in Richards and Little's Compendium, here considered, many of
our difficulties as to the geography of the Book of Mormon--if not all
of them in fact, will have passed away. In that event much found in
this treatise of the Book of Mormon relative to the Nephites being in
South America--written under the impression that the passage in the
above named Compendium was, as is there set forth, a revelation--will
have to be modified.

And let me here say a word in relation to new discoveries in our
knowledge of the Book of Mormon, and for matter of that in relation
to all subjects connected with the work of the Lord in the earth. We
need not follow our researches in any spirit of fear and trembling. We
desire only to ascertain the truth; nothing but the truth will endure;
and the ascertainment of the truth and the proclamation of the truth
in any given case, or upon any subject, will do no harm to the work of
the Lord which is itself truth. Nor need we be surprised if now and
then we find our predecessors, many of whom bear honored names and
deserve our respect and gratitude for what they achieved in making
clear the truth, as they conceived it to be--we need not be surprised
if we sometimes find them mistaken in their conceptions and deductions;
just as the generations who succeed us in unfolding in a larger way
some of the yet unlearned truths of the Gospel, will find that we have
had some misconceptions and made some wrong deductions in our day
and time. The book of knowledge is never a sealed book. It is never
"completed and forever closed;" rather it is an eternally open book,
in which one may go on constantly discovering new truths and modifying
our knowledge of old ones. The generation which preceded us did not
exhaust by their knowledge all the truth, so that nothing was left for
us in its unfolding; no, not even in respect of the Book of Mormon; any
more than we shall exhaust all discovery in relation to that book and
leave nothing for the generation following us to develop. All which is
submitted, especially to the membership of the Church, that they may
be prepared to find and receive new truths both in the Book of Mormon
itself and about it; and that they may also rejoice in the fact that
knowledge of truth is inexhaustible, and will forever go on developing.


_Of the Objection that the Transcript of Characters Made from
the Nephite Plates by Joseph Smith, a Few Lines of which have been
Preserved, Bear no Resemblance to the Hieroglyphics and Language
Characters Discovered in Central America on Stone Tablets, Maya Books
and Mexican Picture Writing_.

This is an objection most vehemently urged by Rev. M. T. Lamb, author
of "The Golden Bible," already several times quoted in this division
of my treatise. Mr. Lamb takes the three lines of characters of Joseph
Smith's transcript, and confronts them with a _fac simile_ of Landa's
Maya Alphabet, and also engravings from some of the stone tablets from
Palenque and Copan, and then triumphantly invites comparison in the
following passages:

    We ask the candid reader carefully to examine these characters,
    and then look back again to page 261. Those [Joseph's transcript
    from the plates] are the characters Joseph Smith tells us were
    universally used in Central America 1,500 and 2,000 years
    ago--while the ruins, the engraved stones, the chiselled marble,
    tell us that these [Mr. Lamb's reproduction of Landau's Maya
    Alphabet] were the characters actually used in that locality, and
    at that time. Look at the two attentively--see if you can discover
    any likeness whatever between them. A woeful fatality, is it
    not? that there should not happen to be even one of Mr. Smith's
    characters that bears a family likeness, or the least particle
    of resemblance to the characters actually used by the ancient
    inhabitants of Central America! [39]

Commenting again upon the characters of Joseph Smith's transcript, Mr.
Lamb says:

    The longer you look at them the more modern and familiar they will
    become until Professor Anthon's designation, a "hoax" will not seem
    at all surprising even to a candid Mormon. And if that word is not
    the proper one, this certainly must be acknowledged, that they are
    the most unfortunate specimen of ancient characters that have ever
    been exhibited; for they have a fearfully suspicious look, and
    it would take the clearest possible evidence to drive away that
    suspicion from any intelligent and unprejudiced mind. [40]

These are rather formidable conclusions to force upon us from a basis
of comparison so narrow as that furnished by the three lines of Joseph
Smith's transcript. This preserved scrap, published first in the
"Prophet," New York, December 21st, 1844 [41] of three lines, or even
that of seven lines preserved with the Whitmer Manuscript, are evidently
not all that were submitted to Professor Anthon [42] by Martin Harris.
Professor Anthon in describing the characters submitted to him as a
transcript from the plates, says:

    This paper in question was, in fact, a singular scroll. It
    consisted of all kinds of singular characters disposed in columns,
    and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him
    at the time a book containing various alphabets, Greek and Hebrew
    letters, crosses and flourishes; Roman letters inverted or placed
    sideways were arranged and placed in perpendicular columns, and the
    whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle, divided into various
    compartments, arched with various strange marks, and evidently
    copied after the Mexican calendar by Humboldt, but copied in such a
    way as not to betray the source whence it was derived.

Neither the three lined transcript, [43] nor the seven, meets this
description of Anthon's though they may have constituted a part, and
doubtless were a part of what was submitted to Professors Anthon and
Mitchell. But neither of the two transcripts furnishes data for the
conclusions of Mr. Lamb, since we have in them so few of the Nephite
characters as a basis of comparison. But even from data so meagre as
that furnished by these transcripts, it is possible to show that Mr.
Lamb and others who have made like objection are too hasty in their
conclusions. On a separate page, I give a photographic reproduction
of the ancient Maya Alphabet as engraved by Dr. Augustus Le Plongeon,
from the mural inscriptions of the Mayas, and the Egyptian Hieratic
Alphabet according to Messrs. Champollion, Le Jeune and Bunsen. The
whole page is a photograph reproduction of a page from the preface of
Le Plongeon's Work, "Sacred Mysteries Among the Mayas and the Quiches,"
page xii.

[Tables of characters captioned "Ancient Maya Hieratic alphabet according
to mural inscriptions." and "Egyptian Hieratic alphabet according to Messrs.
Champollion, Le Jeune and Bunsen."]

[Image captioned _"Transcript of Ancient Egyptian characters from
Rawlinson's History of Egypt_.]

[Image captioned _Transcript from Nephite plates, by Joseph Smith_.]

Two things are to be observed with reference to these two alphabets:
First, the strong resemblance between many of the American and Egyptian
characters; second, the resemblance of some of the characters in
the transcript from the Nephite plates to some of the characters in
both the so-called Maya and the Egyptian Alphabet. And although the
Nephite characters are so few, and some allowance must be made for
unskilfulness in making the transcriptions, yet there is to be seen a
strong family likeness between the characters of all three productions
here presented, Mr. Lamb and others to the contrary notwithstanding.
And that family likeness between the Nephite characters and Egyptian
writing is made more impressive by the second page of _fac similies_
herewith presented, consisting first of a photographic reproduction of
a transcript, of the three kinds of writing employed by the Egyptians
in ancient times, from the work of George Rawlinson, compared with
Joseph Smith's transcript of Nephite characters. The first line from
Rawlinson's work is the Hieroglyphic form of Egyptian writing, the
second the Hieratic, the third the Demotic. [44]

It will be observed, as Mr. Rawlinson himself points out, that "there
is not much difference between the hieratic and the demotic." The
former is the earlier of the two. And now, notwithstanding the fact
that the Nephites wrote in characters that they called "Reformed
Egyptian"--which I understand to mean, in altered or changed Egyptian
characters yet, I submit, that when the transcript of Nephite
characters made by Joseph Smith is compared with the transcript from
the works of Mr. Rawlinson, there is a strong family likeness very
gratifying to believers in the Book of Mormon, and the force of
Mr. Lamb's objection on this head is destroyed by these submitted
facts, viz., the few Nephite characters preserved from Joseph Smith's
transcripts, disclose a strong family resemblance to the ancient forms
of Egyptian writing, and even some similarities to the ancient Maya
Alphabet published by Le Plongeon.


1. I Peter i: 18-25. Rev. xiii: 8.

2. Titus i: 1, 2.

3. Heb. x: 1.

4. I. Cor. x: 1-4.

5. Mr. Campbell cites the first edition throughout.

6. Heb. xiii: 20.

7. II. Nephi v: 26. II. Nephi vi: 2.

8. Alma v: 44. Alma xiii.

9. Judges vi: 15.

10. Judges vi.

11. See this Vol. chapter xxxv.

12. Ephesians iii: 5, 6.

13. I. Nephi x; also book of Jacob, chapter v.

14. Col. i: 2, 3.

15. Isaiah xlii: 6, 7.

16. Isaiah xlix: 6-9 et seq., specially verses 20-22. Paul himself
quotes Isaiah xlix: 6; see Acts xiii: 47. Simeon in the temple quotes
Isaiah; see Luke ii: 30, 32.

17. I. Nephi xix: 10.

18. Alma viii: 7.

19. So Hyde: "He [Joseph Smith, through the Book of Mormon] determines
none of the great questions pending in the world at large, but only
the minor difficulties that would have been likely to have reached a
western village." Hyde's "Mormonism," p. 281.

20. Moroni viii.

21. Following is Mosheim's description of baptism in the third century:
"Baptism was publicly administered twice a year, to such candidates
as had gone through a long preparation and trial; and none were
present as spectators, but such as had been themselves baptized. *
* * None were admitted to the sacred font until the exorcist, by a
solemn menacing formula, had declared them free from bondage to the
prince of darkness and now servants of God. * * * The persons baptized
returned home, decorated with a crown and white robe; the first being
indicative of their victory over the world and their lusts, the latter
of their acquired innocence." (Mosheim's Institute, Century Three,
chapter iv.) In describing baptism in the century previous--and the
same things accompanied it in the third and fourth--he tells how "the
baptized were signed with the cross, anointed, commended to God by
prayer and imposition of hands, and finally directed to taste some
milk and honey;" also how "Sponsors, or Godfathers, were employed for
adults, and afterwards for children likewise." All of which mummeries
were additions to the sublimely beautiful and simple ordinance of the
baptism of the gospel.

22. See Science of Religion, p. 193-300.

23. "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors." (Graves), pp. 303-4.

24. Alma xxx: 44.

25. Helaman xii: 13-15.

26. "Golden Bible," p. 336.

27. "In the sixth century before our era," remarks Andrew D. White
("History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom," Vol.
I, pp. 120, 121), "Pythagoras, and after him Philolaus, had suggested
the movement of the earth and planets about a central fire; and,
three centuries later, Aristarchus had restated the main truth with
striking precision. Here comes in a proof that the antagonism between
theological and scientific methods is not confined to Christianity; for
this statement brought upon Aristarchus the charge of blasphemy, and
drew after it a cloud of prejudice which hid the truth for six hundred
years. Not until the fifth century of our era did it timidly appear
in the thoughts of Martianus Capella; then it was again lost to sight
for a thousand years, until in the fifteenth century, distorted and
imperfect, it appeared in the writings of Cardinal Nicholas de Cusa."

28. "American Antiquities" (Priest), p. 272.

29. "Ancient America," (Baldwin), p. 42.

30. "Ancient America," (Baldwin), pp. 122, 123.

31. "Conquest of Mexico," (Prescott), Vol. I., p. 103.

32. "Pre-Historic America," (Nadaillac), p. 305.

33. Bancroft's Works, Vol. II., p. 502.

34. Dr. W. M. Paden, Pastor of the first Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake
City, Utah, in a Discourse against the Book of Mormon, March 21, 1904.

35. Ibid.

36. Golden Bible, pp. 308, 309.

37. This work Vol. II., p. 138.

38. Compendium, p. 289.

39. "The Golden Bible," p. 265. I quote from the 1887 edition, which I
understand to be the revised and enlarged one. [45]

40. Ibid., p. 260.

41. "The Prophet" was a Mormon weekly periodical, published by S.
Brannan from May, 1844, to May 24, 1845.

42. A fac simile of which is given in Vol. II., p. 72.

43. Volume II., this work p. 76. This is from his letter to E. D. Howe;
in a second letter to Rev. Coit, Anthon gives a similar description.
(Ibid., pp. 79, 78.)

44. Boston 1882, two volumes. The photographed transcript will be found
in Vol. I. of Rawlinson, p. 120.




_Alleged Plagiarisms of Historical and Biblical Events_.

It is charged against the Book of Mormon that many of its historical
incidents are mere plagiarisms of historical and Biblical events. I
shall only be able to indicate a few of these charges, and point out
the means by which they may be fairly met. I call attention to the
fact, in the first place, that some of the charges are absolutely
false; that they are based on misquotations and misstated incidents.
In other cases the comparison is very much strained to get the result
of likeness, and throughout the likelihood of similarity in human
experience is entirely overlooked.

Mr. John Hyde declares that Nephi's description of the rise of a great
and abominable church immediately after the days of the Messiah on
earth, together with his description of her pride, power, and cruelty,
is a quotation from the book of Revelations, "A description of the
Church of Rome;" [1] the abduction of the daughters of the Lamanites
by the Priests of King Noah; [2] the martyrdom of Alma's converts in
the land of Ammonihah; [3] and the slaughter of the converts of Ammon
among the Lamanites, [4] are events "borrowed from the history of Nero,
Caligula, and Fox's book of Martyrs."

In Alma's conversion, he sees "an imitation of Paul's miraculous
conversion" with this difference; that Paul was struck with blindness
for three days, and Alma is struck dumb for two days! [5] In the remarks
of King Mosiah on the advantages of a government by the people as
against the rule of absolute monarchs, our author sees the doctrine
of "Vox populi vox Dei," [6] although that idea nowhere occurs in the
passage to which he gives reference, and in fact, in no passage of the
Book of Mormon. These citations from the long list that our author
makes out will perhaps be sufficient from him. Those who wish to trace
out this class of objections, as he makes them, may consult his work. [7]

A more recent writer enters into the same line of argument in greater
detail. [8] His theory is that the author of the Book of Mormon set
out to "beat the Bible" in the matter of wonderful things recorded.
Thus in the "eight barges" of the Jaredites he sees an attempt to
outdo the Bible account of Noah's "one ark." In a complete vision
granted to the brother of Jared of the pre-existent spirit-personage
of the Messiah, he sees the partial view of the same personage granted
to Moses outdone. In the fact that the Nephite prophet, Abinadi,
interpreted certain writings upon the wall of a temple, he sees an
imitation of Daniel's exploit of reading the writing on the wall of
Belshazzar's palace. In Ether's expressed doubt as to his own fate,
whether he would be granted the privilege of translation or be required
to pass through the ordeal of death, he sees the counterpart of the
story of Elijah's ascent into heaven. In the retention of three of
the Nephite apostles on earth until Messiah shall come in his glory,
he sees the New Testament intimation and the early Christian notion
that the apostle John might be granted such a privilege--if such it
could be regarded--outdone. In the signs of Messiah's birth, granted
to the Nephites--the night of continuous light and the appearance of
a new star in the heavens; as also in the signs of his crucifixion
and burial--three hours of tempest and earthquake while the Son of
Man was on the cross, and three days of darkness while he lay in the
tomb [9]--our author sees again an effort to outdo the Bible signs
accompanying Messiah's birth and death.

In the account given in III Nephi [10] of the multitude being permitted
to come in personal contact with the Savior one by one, and touch the
scars of the wounds he had received in crucifixion, Rev. Lamb sees an
effort to outdo the New Testament story of Thomas thrusting his hands
in the wounds of our Savior, that he might be convinced of the reality
of his resurrection. Indeed, the Reverend gentleman makes very much of
this circumstance. He supposes the multitude granted this privilege
numbered 2,500; and allowing that five persons would pass the Savior
every minute, giving each one twelve seconds to thrust his hand into
Messiah's side, and feel the print of the nails, would require "eight
hours and twenty minutes of time!" [11] The Reverend Gentleman, however,
neglected to give the matter due consideration. The number of the
multitude, 2,500, is given at the close of the first day's visit of
Messiah to the Nephites; whereas, the circumstance of the people being
allowed to personally come in contact with the Savior, is an event
that took place early in the day, almost immediately upon the Christ's
appearance in fact, and when the "multitude" was much smaller than
at the close of the day. Two circumstances lead to the belief that
the crowd was greatly augmented through the day. For instance, after
some considerable time had elapsed after his appearing, and after the
multitude had gone forth and felt the wounds in his hands and feet,
Jesus called for their sick and afflicted, that he might heal them. It
is unreasonable to suppose that the blind and halt and sick were with
the "multitude" when Jesus first appeared, as the latter were a party
strolling about the temple viewing the changes wrought in the land by
the recent cataclysms, while the sick and maimed with their attendants
would doubtless be at their homes. Therefore, many of the people
departed from the presence of Jesus to bring to him these afflicted
ones; and as they went on this errand of mercy they doubtless spread
the news of Christ's presence among them, with the result that the
people were gathered together throughout the day.

Again, after blessing their afflicted ones, the Lord Jesus caused
their children to be gathered together, that he might bless them;
which doubtless in many cases caused parents to hasten again to their
homes and ever as they went the news spread further and further of the
Messiah's presence, until finally, at the close of the day's gathering,
2,500 were found to be present. It by no means follows, however, that
all this number thrust their hands into the wounds of Messiah; but only
the very much smaller number that was gathered about the temple in the
land of Bountiful earlier in the day, when Messiah appeared to them.

Our author sees in these things I have quoted and some others that
he details, plagiarisms of Bible events; and concludes that the Book
of Mormon, instead of being what it claims to be, is largely but a
collection of Bible events distorted by Joseph Smith's inventions.

It places a Christian minister, believing as he does in the divinity
of both the Old and New Testament, at a very great disadvantage to
make this kind of an argument. Suppose we were to apply it as a test
of the New Testament? We could then say that the ascension of Jesus,
recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, is but an imitation of the
glorious ascension of Elijah into heaven in the presence of a host of
angels. [12] We could say that the special miracles wrought by the hands
of Paul so that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs
and aprons to the afflicted, and "the diseases departed from them and
the evil spirits went out of them," is but an imitation of what Elijah
did when he sent his staff by the hands of his servant, commanding him
to lay it on the face of the dead child of his Shunammite friend to
restore him to life. [13]

"It might be said, also, that in the subsequent conduct of Elijah in
restoring this same child to life, we have the original of the New
Testament story of Jarius's daughter. [14] In this same chapter of
Kings we have the following story of Elisha's miraculously feeding a

    And there came a man from Baalshalisha, and brought the man of God
    bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears
    of corn in the husk thereof. And he said, Give unto the people,
    that they may eat. And his servitor said, What, should I set this
    before an hundred men? He said again, Give the people, that they
    may eat: for thus saith the Lord, They shall eat, and shall leave
    thereof. So he set before them, and they did eat, and left thereof,
    according to the word of the Lord.

"Who can doubt," the Biblical sceptic might ask, "but what this story
inspired that of the Evangelists concerning the miraculous feeding of
five thousand people, in a desert place, from five loaves, and two
fishes. [15] The excess of people mentioned in the New Testament--five
thousand thus miraculously fed as against Elijah's one hundred--"could
be pointed to as an effort of the New Testament writer to merely
"outdo" in the marvelous the miracles of the Old Testament.

Again, it might be continued that the story of tenth Revelations, where
a little book is given to John the apostle to eat, one that should
be bitter in his belly, but in his mouth sweet as honey, is but a
plagiarism of a very similar story told in Ezekiel where that prophet
is commanded to eat the roll of the book, and it was in his mouth "as
the honey for sweetness." [16]

Thus we might continue in drawing such parallels, but there would be
neither profit nor argument in doing so. Such procedure is scarcely
worthy the name of criticism. It reminds one of Shakespeare's Rosalind
finding the doggerel verses of the love-sick swain, Orlando, hanging
upon the trees of the forest of Arden, and of Rosalind reading them--

  From the east to the western Ind,
  No Jewel is like Rosalind.
  All the pictures fairest lined,
  Are but black to Rosalind.
  Let no fair be kept in mind,
  But the fair of Rosalind.

Which doggerel the more sensible Touchstone, listening to--and
impatient at withal--finally breaks in upon the fair reader with:

    "I'll rhyme you so eight years together, dinners and suppers and
    sleepin-hours excepted:--for a taste--

  If a hart do lack a hind,
  Let him seek out Rosalind.
  If the cat will after kind,
  So be sure will Rosalind.
  Winter garments must be lined,
  So must slendor Rosalind.
  They that reap must sheef and bind,
  Then to cart with Rosalind.
  Sweetest nut hath sourest rind,
  Such a nut is Rosalind.

So with like result one might run on with this kind of argument
based upon the Book of Mormon's alleged plagiarisms from the Hebrew


_The Absence of Book of Mormon Names Both of Place and Persons in
Native American Language_.

It is objected to the Book of Mormon that there nowhere appears in
native American languages Book of Mormon names. "During the one
thousand years of their recorded history," says one, "as given in
the Book of Mormon, the old familiar names of Lehi, Nephi, Laman,
Lemuel and others are constantly recurring; they held on to them with
reverential pertinacity. If the Book of Mormon were a true record
we should find these names in abundance among various Indian races
scattered over both continents." The absence of Book of Mormon names in
the native language, is held to be fatal testimony against the claims
of the Book of Mormon by this writer. [17]

One recognizes here a real difficulty, and one for which it is quite
hard to account. It must be remembered, however, that from the close of
the Nephite period, 420 A. D., to the coming of the Spaniards in the
sixteenth century, we have a period of over one thousand years; and we
have the triumph also of the Lamanites over the Nephites bent on the
destruction of every vestige of Nephite traditions and institutions.
May it not be that they recognized as one of the means of achieving
such destruction the abrogation of the old familiar names of things
and persons? Besides there is the probable influx of other tribes and
peoples into America in that one thousand years whose names may have
largely taken the place of Nephite and Lamanite names.

I have already suggested that the name "Nahuas" and the adjective
derived from it, "Nahuatl," are probably variations of the names
"Nephi" and "Nephite," derived, it may be, together with the Bible
names "Nepheg," "Nephish," "Nephishesim," and "Naphtali" from a common
Hebrew root. [18] Also, that the name "Hohgates," by which names the
seven mythical strangers were called who in ancient times settled at
Point St. George on the Pacific coast near San Francisco, is a survival
of the Book of Mormon name "Hagoth," who is prominent in the Book of
Mormon narrative as the man who first started maritime migrations from
South America, northward along the Pacific coast of North America. [19]

Mr. Priest, the author of "American Antiquities," declares that the
word "Amazon," the name of the chief river of South America, is an
Indian word. [20] Early in the century in which Messiah was born, four
of the sons of the Nephite king, Mosiah II, departed from Zarahemla on
a mission to the Lamanites. At that time the Lamanites occupied the
lands formerly possessed by the Nephites, previous to the migration of
the more righteous part of that people to Zarahemla--the old "land of
Nephi." This land, so far as can be determined, corresponds somewhat
to the modern country of Ecuador and perhaps the northern part of
Peru. [21] In this region, it will be remembered, the river Amazon takes
its rise. The leader of the Nephite missionary expedition referred
to was Ammon, doubtless the oldest son of King Mosiah II. [22] Such
were the achievements of this man; such his rank, and such his high
character that it is not difficult or unreasonable to believe that his
name was given by the people to the principal stream of the land, and
that it has survived under the modern variation of the name Amazon.

Again, the word "Andes," the name of the chief mountain range in South
America, is quite generally supposed, if not conceded by the best
authorities, to come from the native Peruvian word "Anti," meaning
copper. [23]

The Peruvians, in order to cultivate some mountainous parts of their
country, terraced the mountain sides, facing the same with stone. These
terraces the Spaniards called "Andenes," whence some suppose the name
"Andes." "But the name," says Prescott, "is older than the Conquest,
according to Varcilasso, who traces it to 'Anti,' the name of a
province that lay east of Cuzco. 'Anta,' the word for copper, which was
found abundant in certain quarters of the country, may have suggested
the name of the province, if not immediately that of the mountains." [24]

In any event we have the words "Anti" and "Anta" established as native
American words, and the word "Anti" is of frequent use in the Book of
Mormon in a number of compound words, such as "Anti-Nephi-Lehi," the
name of a Lamanite king or chief about B. C. 83. [25] The same name was
given to his people, that is, they were called "Anti-Nephi-Lehi's," [26]
and possibly it may have been given to the land they occupied. If so
it accounts for the word "Anti" surviving as the name of a province,
according to Garcilasso, lying east of Cuzco.

We also have the word "Antiomno," [27] the name of a Lamanite king;
"Antionah," the name of a chief; "Antionum," both the name of a
man, [28] and also the name of a city; [29] also the word "Antiparah," a
Nephite city; [30] "Antipas," the name of a mountain; [31] and "Antipus,"
the name of a Nephite military leader. [32]

It is true these words in the Book of Mormon, are written as simple
words, but they are susceptible of being regarded as compound words, as
follows: "Anti-Omno," "Anti-Pas," "Anti-Parah," and so following. If
the Peruvian terraces derived their name from this native word "Anti,"
then when applied to Nephite lands Anti-Onum would doubtless mean the
terraced lands of Onum, and Anti-Parah, the name of a city, would
doubtless be the terraced city of Parah, and so following.

But after all this is said it is still a matter of regret that more of
the Nephite names, both of men and countries, have not survived in the
native American languages. Still the field of knowledge of American
antiquities has not yet been thoroughly explored, and when its buried
cities and monuments shall be more thoroughly known all the evidences
that can be demanded along these lines will doubtless be produced.


_Nephi's Temple_.

First Nephi gives the following account of building a temple in the New

    And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after
    the manner of the temple of Solomon, save it were not built of so
    many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land;
    wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon's temple. But
    the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon;
    and the workmanship thereof was exceeding fine. [33]

This statement is unfairly dealt with by objectors. They generally
represent it as saying that Nephi, in this description, holds out the
idea that he duplicated Solomon's temple, excepting as to the richness
of the materials employed in its construction. Then an elaborate
description of the greatness and architectural grandeur of Solomon's
temple is given. Attention is also called to the fact that the Hebrew
nation bent all their energies through seven years of activity in
constructing the temple of Solomon; that they were aided by surrounding
peoples, notably by King Hiram and the Tyrians.

After all this is explained then comes what is supposed to be an
insurmountable difficulty, namely: Lehi's colony that came from
Jerusalem to America was a very small one, consisting of two families
only, Lehi's and Ishmael's, and in addition the man Zoram, perhaps not
exceeding a score of adult persons on their arrival in the promised
land. Then after some time this colony is divided; the more righteous
branch following Nephi, and the wicked following his elder brothers
Laman and Lemuel. So that it is safe to conclude that during the
lifetime of the first Nephi the colony remained a very small one;
and since this temple was built about thirty years after the colony
departed from Jerusalem, the Nephite division of it could not have
included more than one hundred adults. How, then, it is triumphantly
asked, could this small colony duplicate Solomon's temple, renowned for
its architectural beauty and greatness, and which required seven years
for the nation of the Hebrews to construct, assisted by surrounding
people and the great treasuries which David, in his reign, had
accumulated for that sacred purpose?

The answer to the objection is to be found in a denial of the
construction put upon Nephi's description of his temple. That
description does not warrant the conclusion that Nephi's temple was a
duplicate of Solomon's, except as to the "manner of the construction,"
from which it is to be inferred that the general plan of the structure
followed that of Solomon's, but it does not follow that it was anything
like Solomon's in the extent or largeness of it; but in the arrangement
of its courts; its several divisions and subdivisions were built
"after the manner" and for the purposes for which Solomon's temple was
constructed. So that the labored argument as to the inability of so
small a colony as Lehi's duplicating Solomon's temple is merely so much
wasted energy, since no one is bound to hold that in its dimensions
and greatness the Nephite Temple equaled Solomon's temple. It was only
like unto Solomon's temple in its arrangement and uses, but doubtless
by this colony was regarded as a very great achievement, as undoubtedly
it was, and they would likely speak of it in the superlative degree of
admiration in describing it.


_The Difficulty of Iron and Steel Among the Nephites_.

The Book of Mormon repeatedly affirms the Nephite knowledge of the
fusion of metals, and their knowledge and use of both iron and steel.
As many writers on American Antiquities deny the knowledge and use of
these metals by the ancient Americans, their alleged existence in the
Book of Mormon is generally regarded as a capital objection to that
record. Not all the influential writers, however, are on that side of
the question.

    "There is no evidence," says Bancroft, "that the use of iron was
    known except the extreme difficulty of clearing forests and carving
    stone with implements of stone and soft copper." [34]

Referring to some of the stones in the ruins of Peruvian buildings,
Prescott remarks:

    Many of these stones were of vast size; some of them being full
    thirty-eight feet long, by eighteen broad, and six feet thick. We
    are filled with astonishment when we consider that these enormous
    masses were hewn from their native bed and fashioned into shape by
    a people ignorant of the use of iron. [35]

But why could not the argument of Wilkinson be followed when confronted
with a similar problem respecting the ancient Egyptian works in stone?
He allowed that the achievements of that ancient people in quarrying
and shaping huge blocks of stone to be an evidence of their knowledge
and use of iron, but that its tendency to decomposition and oxidation
prevented any specimens of it from being preserved. [36]

Later, notwithstanding Prescott's disagreement with the argument, some
of the best authorities sustained the conclusions of Wilkinson. George
Rawlinson, for instance, in his "History of Ancient Egypt," says:

    In metals Egypt was deficient. * * * * Copper, iron, and lead do,
    however, exist in portions of the eastern desert, and one iron mine
    shows signs of having been anciently worked.

"Then," he remarks, "the metal is found in form of specular and red
iron ore. Still, none of these metals seem to have been obtained by the
Egyptians from their own land in any considerable quantity. In a foot
note he says this mine lies in the eastern desert between the Nile and
Red Sea, at a place called Hammami." [37] Later, he says:

    It has been much questioned whether iron was employed at all by
    the Egyptians until the time of the Greek conquest. The weapons
    and implements and ornaments of iron which have been found in
    the ancient cities are so few, while those of bronze are so
    numerous, and the date of the few iron objects discovered is so
    uncertain that there is strong temptation to embrace the simple
    theory that iron was first introduced into Egypt by the Ptolemies.
    Difficulties, however, stand in the way of a complete adoption of
    this view. A fragment of a thin plate of iron was found by Col.
    Vyse imbedded in the masonry of the great pyramid. [38]

Continuing, he says:

    Some iron implements and ornaments have been found in the tombs
    with nothing about them indicative of their belonging to the late
    period. The paucity of such instances is partially, if not wholly
    accounted for, by the rapid decay of iron in the nitrous earth
    of Egypt, or when oxidized by exposure to the air. It seems very
    improbable that the Hebrew and Canaanites should for centuries have
    been well acquainted with the use of iron, and their neighbors
    of Egypt, whose civilization was far more advanced, have been
    ignorant of it. On these grounds the most judicious of modern
    Egyptologists seem to hold, that while the use of iron by the
    Egyptians in Pharaonic times was at the best rare and occasional,
    it was not wholely unknown, though less appreciated than we should
    have expected. Iron spear-heads, iron cycles, iron gimlets, iron
    bracelets, iron keys, iron wire were occasionally made use of,
    but the Egyptians on the whole were contented with their bronze
    implements and weapons, which were more easily produced and which
    they found to answer every purpose. [39]

May it not be argued with equal reason, that the Lamanites, after the
conquest of the Nephites, found themselves in the same condition, that
is, it was easier for them to convert copper into such implements as
they desired than iron, until finally the use of iron was discontinued
and the art of manufacturing it lost.

Baldwin says of the Peruvians:

 Iron was unknown to them in the time of the Incas, although some
 maintain that they had it in the previous ages, to which belong the
 ruins of Lake Titicaca. Iron ore was and still is very abundant in
 Peru. It is impossible to conceive how the Peruvians were able to
 cut and work stone in such a masterly way, or to construct their
 great roads and aqueducts without the use of iron tools. Some
 of the languages of the country, and perhaps all, had names for
 iron; in official Peruvian it was called "quillay," and in the old
 Chilian tongue "panilic." "It is remarkable," observes Molina, "that
 iron, which has been thought unknown to the ancient Americans,
 has particular names in some of their tongues." It is not easy to
 understand why they had names for this metal, if they never at any
 time had knowledge of the metal itself. In the "Mercurio Peruano,"
 (tome i., p. 201, 1791), it is stated that, anciently, the Peruvian
 sovereigns, "worked magnificent iron mines at Ancoriames, on the west
 shore of Lake Titicaca;" but I can not give the evidence used in
 support of this statement. [40].

DeRoo says:

    Iron seems to have been unknown in America at the time of the
    Spanish discovery, but the Mound-Builders' graveyards, afford proof
    that they not only knew it, but manufactured it into tools and
    implements. In the sepulchral mound at Marietta (Ohio) there was
    found in the year 1819 a little lump of iron ore that had almost
    the specific gravity of pure iron, and presented the appearance of
    being partially smelted, while in the mound at Circleville oxidized
    iron was unearthed in the shape of a plate. [41]

Referring again to what was found in the mound at Marietta, he says:

    In June of 1819, upon opening a mound at Marietta, some very
    remarkable objects were discovered, consisting of three large
    circular copper bosses thickly overlaid with silver, and apparently
    intended as ornaments for a buckler or a sword-belt. On the reverse
    were two plates fastened by a copper rivet or nail, around which
    was a flaxen thread, while between the plates were two small pieces
    of leather. The copper showed much signs of decay; it was almost
    reduced to an oxide; but the silver, though much corroded, resumed
    its natural brilliancy on being burnished. In the same tumulus was
    also found a hollow silver plate six inches long and two broad,
    intended apparently as the upper part of a sword-scabbard. The
    scabbard itself seems to have perished in the course of time, as no
    other portion of it was found, with the exception of a few broken,
    rust-eaten pieces of a copper tube, which was likely intended for
    the reception of the point of the weapon. [42]

Josiah Priest has the following passages on the subject of the
discoveries of iron in the mounds of America:

    We have examined the blade of a sword found in Philadelphia, now
    in Peel's Museum, in New York, which was taken out of the ground
    something more than sixty feet below the surface. The blade is
    about twenty inches in length, is sharp on one edge, with a thick
    back, a little turned up at the point, with a shank drawn out
    three or four inches long, on which was doubtless, inserted in
    the handle, and clenched at the end. It is known that the swords
    of all ancient nations were very short, on which account, their
    wars on the field of battle, were but an immense number of single
    combats. [43]

Describing what was found in one of the mounds at Circleville, in Ohio,
upon the authority of Mr. Atwater, who was present when the mound was
opened, he says:

    The handle, either of a small sword, or a large knife, made of an
    elk's horn; around the end where the blade had been inserted, was
    a ferule of silver, which, though black, was not much injured by
    time; though the handle showed the hole where the blade had been
    inserted, yet no iron was found, but an oxide or rust remained,
    of similiar shape and size. The swords of the ancient nations of
    the old world, it is known, were very short. Charcoal, and wood
    ashes, on which these articles lay, were surrounded by several
    bricks, very well burnt. The skeleton appeared to have been burnt
    in a large and very hot fire. * * About twenty feet to the north of
    it (i. e. the skeleton) was another, with which was found a large
    mirror. * * * On this mirror was a plate of iron, which had become
    an oxide, but before it was disturbed by the spade, resembled a
    plate of cast iron. The mirror answered the purpose very well for
    which it was intended. [44]

    Iron was known to the antediluvians; it was also known to the
    ancients of the west. Copper ore is very abundant, in many places
    of the west; and, therefore, as they had a knowledge of it when
    they first came here they knew how to work it, and form it into
    tools and ornaments. This is the reason why so many articles
    of this metal are found in their works; and even if they had a
    knowledge of iron ore, and knew how to work it, all articles made
    of it must have become oxidized as appears from what few specimens
    have been found, while those of copper are more imperishable. [45]

Quoting Mr. Atwater again, Priest says:

    There is a tradition (among the Indians) that Florida had once been
    inhabited by white people, who had the use of iron tools; their
    oldest Indians say, when children, they had often heard it spoken
    of by the old people of the tribe, that anciently, stumps of trees
    covered with earth, were frequently found, which had been cut
    down by edged tools. Whoever they were, or from whatever country
    they may have originated, the account, as given by Morse, the
    geographer, of the subterranean wall found in North Carolina, goes
    very far to show they had a knowledge of iron ore; and consequently
    knew how to work it, or they could not have had iron tools, as the
    Shawanese Indians relate. [46]


    On the river Gasconade, which empties into the Missouri, on the
    southern side, (about 70 miles west of St. Louis) are found the
    traces of ancient works, similar to those in North Carolina. In
    the saltpetre caves of that region, the Gasconade country, in
    particular, were discovered, when they were first visited, axes
    and hammers made of iron; which led to the belief that they had
    formerly worked those caves for the sake of the nitre. Dr. Beck,
    from whose Gazetteer of Missouri and Illinois, (p. 234), we have
    this account, remarks, however, that "it is difficult to decide
    whether these tools were left there by the present race of Indians,
    or a more civilized race of people. * * * * This author considers
    the circumstance of finding those tools in the nitre caves, as
    furnishing a degree of evidence that the country of Gasconade river
    was formerly settled by a race of men who were acquainted with
    the use of iron, and exceeded the Indians in civilization and a
    knowledge of the arts. [47]

In the town of Pompey, Onondaga county, New York, in one of the mounds
where Mr. Priest describes the finding of glass, he also says:

    In the same grave with the bottle was found an iron hatchet,
    edged with steel. The eye, or place for the helve, was round, and
    extended or projected out, like the ancient Swiss or German axe. *
    * * * In the same town, on lot No. 17, were found the remains of a
    blacksmith's forge; at this spot have been ploughed up crucibles,
    such as mineralogists use in refining metals.

    These axes are similar, and correspond in character with those
    found in the nitrous caves on the Gasconade river, which empties
    into the Missouri, as mentioned in Professor Beck's Gazatteer of
    that country. * * * * * Within the range of these works have been
    found pieces of cast iron, broken from some vessel of considerable
    thickness. These articles cannot well be ascribed to the era of the
    French war, as time enough since then till the region around about
    Onondaga was commenced to be cultivated, had not elapsed to give
    the growth of timber found on the spot, of the age above noticed;
    and, added to this, it is said that the Indians occupying that
    tract of country had no tradition of their authors. [48]

Again he states:

    Anv'ls of iron have been found in Pompey, (Onondaga county) in
    the same quarter of the country with the other discoveries, as
    above related; which we should naturally expect to find, or it
    might be inquired how could axes, and the iron works of wagons, be
    manufactured? [49]

As I have before remarked, it has been contended that the ancient
Americans knew nothing of the fusion of metals, but the presence
of these materials for such purpose goes far towards dispelling
that opinion. It is true that Mr. Priest advances the opinion that
this forge and these crucibles found in New York, may have been of
Scandinavian origin; still that is but a conjecture, and here I wish to
introduce the testimony of Columbus, quoted by Nadaillac, who says:

    The Mayas knew nothing of iron; copper and gold were the only
    metals they used, and it is doubtful whether they understood
    smelting metals. Christopher Columbus is said, however, to have
    seen, off the coast Honduras, a boat laden with crucibles, filled
    with ingots of metal and hatchets made of copper which had been
    fetched from a distance. ("Prehistoric America," p. 269).

Speaking again of discoveries in the ancient tumuli of America, Priest

    A vast many instances of articles made of copper and sometimes
    plated with silver, have been met with on opening their works.
    Circular pieces of copper, intended either as medals or breast
    plates, have been found, several inches in diameter, very much
    injured by time. In several tumuli the remains of knives, and even
    of swords, in the form of rust, have been discovered. * * * * * But
    besides, there have been found very well manufactured swords and
    knives of iron, and possibly steel, says Mr. Atwater; from which
    we are to conclude that the primitive people of America, either
    discovered the use of iron themselves, as the Greeks did, * * * *
    or that they carried a knowledge of this ore with them at the time
    of their dispersion. [50]

Speaking of the discovery of a skeleton of a man in one of the mounds
of Merrietta, Ohio, he says:

    Two or three pieces of a copper tube were also found with this
    body, filled with iron rust. The pieces from their appearance
    composed the lower end of the scabbard near the point of the sword,
    but no sign of the sword itself, except a streak of rust its whole
    length. [51]

A. J. Connant, A. M., member of the St. Louis Academy of Science, and
of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, published
the following, in 1879:

    From an interesting account of certain mounds in Utah, communicated
    by Mr. Amasa Potter to the Eureka Sentinel, of Nevada, as copied by
    The Western Review of Science and Industry, I make the following
    extracts: The mounds are situated on what is known as the Payson
    Farm, and are six in number, covering twenty acres of ground. They
    are from ten to eighteen feet in height, and from 500 to 1,000 feet
    in circumference. "The explorations divulged no hidden treasure so
    far, but have proved to us that there once undoubtedly existed here
    a more enlightened race of human beings that that of the Indian who
    inhabited this country, and whose records have been traced back
    hundreds of years." While engaged in excavating one of the larger
    mounds, we discovered the feet of a large skeleton, and carefully
    removing the hardened earth in which it was embedded, we succeeded
    in unearthing a large skeleton without injury. The human framework
    measured six feet, six inches in length, and from appearances it
    was undoubtedly that of a male. In the right hand was a large
    iron or steel weapon, which had been buried with the body, but
    which crumbled to pieces on handling. Near the skeleton we also
    found pieces of cedar wood, cut in various fantastic shapes, and
    in a state of perfect preservation; the carving showing that the
    people of this unknown race were acquainted with the use of edged
    tools. [52]

Mr. Conant also refers with approval to several passages I have already
quoted from Dr. Priest's works, and adds on his own account:

    There are certain facts which have been quoted from time to time,
    which fit into none of the popular theories concerning the state
    of the arts of the Mound-builders. It has been stated, and often
    repeated, that they had no knowledge of smelting or casting
    metals, yet the recent discoveries in Wisconsin of implements of
    copper cast in molds--as well as the moulds themselves, of various
    patterns, and wrought with much skill--prove that the age of
    metallurgical arts had dawned in that region at least.

    And again: what shall be said concerning the traces of iron
    implements which have been discovered from time to time in the
    mounds, but more frequently at great depths below the surface of
    the soil. Though accounts of such discoveries are generally from
    reliable sources, they have latterly received no attention, and
    always have been considered as so much perilous ware which no one
    cared to handle. [53]

After referring to their stupendous works in stone, and their skill in
the fine arts, involving the most delicate carving, Mr. Conant remarks
of the old American race who wrought them:

    And it is difficult to conceive how, without cutting implements
    equal, at least, to our own in hardness, such delicate and such
    stupendous works could have been executed. And to the question
    whether they possessed a knowledge of working iron, the wise
    man will hesitate long before he answers in the negative. It
    should be remembered, too, how quickly--unless under most
    favoring conditions--iron corrodes to dust and leaves scarcely a
    trace behind. The piles of the Swiss lake-dwellings, the cedar
    posts of the mounds, may endure for ages, while iron--so hard,
    and more precious than gold in the advancement of the world's
    civilization,--speedily melts away before the gentle dews and air
    of heaven. [54]

There is more to the same effect, but our limits will admit of no
further quotations.


_The Horse and Other Domestic Animals of the Book of Mormon_.

It has to be conceded that the weight of assertion on the part of
writers on American antiquities, is against the existence of the horse,
cow, ass, goat, sheep, etc., in America within historical times, and
before the advent of Europeans. There is no evidence developed so far
that satisfactorily proves that any of the native races of America,
wild or civilized, had any knowledge of the horse and other domestic
animals named at the time of the discovery of America by the Europeans.
The Book of Mormon, however, repeatedly and most positively declares
that all these animals existed in great numbers. The first Nephi, for
instance, says:

    We did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the
    wilderness, that there were beasts in the forest of every kind,
    both the cow and the ox, and the ass and the horse, and the goat
    and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for
    the use of men. [55]

The same animals, with others, are enumerated as existing also in
Jaredite times, and in the reign of King Emer--the fifth of the
Jaredite line of kings--that people are said to have had--

    All manner of cattle, of oxen, and cows, and of sheep, and of
    swine, and of goats, and also many other kind of animals which
    were useful for the food of man; and they also had horses, and
    asses, and there were elephants and cureloms, and cummoms; all of
    which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants, and
    cureloms, and cummoms. [56]

It is to be observed, curiously enough, that elephants are spoken of
as being in use for domestic purposes in connection with the horse and
cattle, etc., and it is rather a striking circumstance that the remains
of these animals, together with those of man, have been unearthed in
various parts of the American continent, though their existence is
accredited to very ancient times--to ages long prior to either Nephite
or Jaredite times. [57]

It is held, of course, by opponents of the Book of Mormon that this
apparent conflict between the book and the supposed facts, as they are
declared to be by the writers on such subjects, constitutes a grave
objection to the claims of the Book of Mormon. And, indeed, in the
present state of our knowledge upon the subject, it has to be admitted
that it constitutes one of our most embarrassing difficulties. Still
it should be remembered that there is a wide difference between a
difficulty for which one has not at hand an adequate explanation, and
one that would be fatal to the claims made for the Book of Mormon. The
fact has to be admitted that the native Americans seemed to have had
no knowledge of the horse at the time of the discovery of America, but
that does not necessarily carry with it the conclusion that he did not
exist and was not used a thousand years before that time. His apparent
extinction may be and is sarcastically referred to as "a very strange
thing," still, "strange things" do sometimes happen; and the extinction
of species of animals is not an unknown thing in the history of our
earth. Indeed our scientists are confronted by just such--nay, with
the identical "strange occurrence;" namely, the sudden and complete
disappearance of the horse from the American continents. First let me
explain that the result of recent long continued investigation upon the
subject leads our scientists to the conclusion that North America was
the original home of the horse--the place of his "evolution." In the
Century Magazine, for November, 1904, is a very elaborate and very able
article on "The Evolution of the Horse in America," really a study of
the "Fossil Wonders of the West," by Henry Fairfield Osborn, Professor
of Zoology in Columbia University, and Curator in the American Museum
of Natural History. Speaking of the migration of the horse from America
to Europe, he says:

    About the early or mid-Pliocene period there apparently occurred
    the long journey of the true American breed horses into Asia and
    Europe and over the newly made land-bridge of Panama or of the
    Antilles into South America. That the true Old World horse actually
    came from America is inferred because of the sudden appearance
    in the Upper Pliocene of the Siwalik Hills of northern India, in
    northern Italy, and in England, of five species of the true horse,
    of which no ancestors have been found in either Europe or Asia.
    Another strong argument for their American origin is found in
    the simultaneous appearance in the same countries of the camel,
    which we positively know to have been an exclusively American-bred
    animal. It is possible, however, that in unexplored portions
    of northern Asia the evolution of true horses may have been
    progressing. I am sanguine that traces of this great exodus and
    migration of the horses will be discovered in the rocks of northern
    Asia, and that this great problem in the history of the horse will
    be solved in favor of America.

Speaking further of the horse in America in very ancient times, our
author says:

    The preglacial or earliest Plieistocene times in America, as in
    Europe were of temperate climate with increasing coldness. The
    country was covered from north to south with three noble species
    of elephants, namely, the northern mammoth, the Columbian mammoth,
    and the imperial mammoth or elephant of Texas; there were also
    large and small camels, and a variety of large ground-sloths which
    had recently made their way over the new land bridge from South
    America. The great number and variety of our preglacial horses
    speak for favorable conditions, and constitute an additional
    proof of the American-origin theory. In 1826 Mitchell aroused
    wide-spread interest by the discovery of the first true fossil
    horse of America, found near the Navesink Highlands of New Jersey.
    This was seventy-eight years ago; it antedated by a quarter of a
    century Leidy's discoveries in Nebraska. The wide geographical
    range, as well as the great variety in size and breed of the
    American preglacial horses, is indicated by the following facts.
    One animal (Equus complicatus), about the size of a small western
    broncho, originally found near Natchez, has been traced all
    over the Southern States from the isles of the Gulf of Mexico
    to South Carolina. A larger horse with very elaborate grinding
    teeth has been found in the Northeastern and Middle States. On
    the extreme western coasts of California and in Oregon occurs the
    large "Pacific horse" perhaps closest to the existing species of
    horse. In Nebraska we quarried a whole season, securing remains of
    hundreds of horses belonging to another species. In a portion of
    this quarry all the larger limb bones were found broken in two.
    This suggested to me the possibility that these larger bones, the
    only ones known to have contained marrow, had been broken by man,
    who was primitively a great marrow eater, but we searched in vain
    for any collateral evidence of this hypothesis. To my knowledge,
    no human remains have been found associated with those of the
    fossil horse in North America; but I confidently expect that such
    association will be discovered, as it has been in South America. By
    far the largest species of either wild or domesticated horse known
    has been determined by Mr. Gidley in Texas, and has appropriately
    been called the "giant horse." The grinding teeth exceed those of
    the Percheron draft-horse by one third. At the other extreme is
    a diminutive horse, discovered both in Florida and in the valley
    of Mexico.* * * * * * A more welcome discovery could hardly be
    imagined, therefore, than that by our party, in 1899, on the
    eastern edge of the Llana Estacado of Texas. It was no less than a
    small herd of six or seven preglacial horses. * * * * * * This true
    American horse was certainly rather ungainly-looking, proportioned
    like the larger primitive horses of Europe, with long body, short
    limbs, sloping sides, and quarters like those of some of the
    zebras. Like the early cave-horses of Europe, it had a large head,
    convex forehead, stout limbs, spreading hoofs and splint-bones
    which represent the last of the lateral toes.

Then, coming to the strange circumstance of the total "elimination of
the horse from the American continents," the professor says:

    When we look back upon the enormous antiquity of our horse, upon
    the ceaseless trials of nature by which it was produced, and upon
    the splendid varities of breeds which roamed over the country in
    preglacial times, we cannot but regard the total elimination of
    this race as a calamity for the North American continent. * * * *
    There is no doubt that we supplied South America with the horses
    which under the peculiar conditions there began to separate into
    a number of distinct breeds. The extremely short-limbed Hippidium
    of the pampas of Argentina was contrasted with the more normal
    long-limbed horses found in various parts of South America. The
    horse also persisted in South America until the advent of man;
    during the Upper Pleistocene lake formations its remains are found
    associated with chipped stone implements, with pottery and fire
    refuse, proving that it was both hunted and eaten. The evidence,
    however, for the total extinction of the horse is as strong in
    South as it is in North America, and it is generally accepted that
    in 1530 Mendoza reintroduced the horse into the La Plata region,
    just as the Spaniards reintroduced it into our Southern States.
    The rapid spread of several breeds of horses in South America
    and of the mustangs in North America bespeak highly favorable
    conditions of life. Many of these horses have reverted to a very
    primitive condition, notably the striped yellow duns of Mexico.
    The increasing cold and the advancing ice sheet of the glacial
    period are commonly assigned as the cause of the extinction of
    American horses. The fact that most of our native fauna became
    extinct at the same time lends probability to this theory. But
    this does not explain the elimination which also occurred to the
    south in Central and South America, and for other reasons it seems
    to me that the temperature theory is not adequate to explain all
    the facts. The great herds of kiangs, or wild asses, and other
    breeds which subsist under the extreme conditions of the northern
    winters, as well as the survival of the horse through the glacial
    period in Europe, demonstrate the capacity of this family to endure
    cold. Another class of causes which should certainly be taken into
    consideration is the occurrence of a wide-spread epidemic among
    the quadrupeds, such as the rinderpest of Africa, or that which is
    spread by the tsetse-fly. In certain parts of South America the
    puma is an animal especially destructive to horses.

May not the last named class of causes be as confidently relied upon to
explain the apparent extinction of the horse in America since the close
of the Nephite period, as to explain his extinction in the more ancient
preglacial times?

What is more embarrassing than the apparent absence of knowledge of the
horse by the natives at the time of the European discovery of America,
is the absence of any positive and abundant evidence of the remains
of the horse in the tumuli or other ruins of the land; and an absence
also of any drawing or other representation of the horse in the native
picture writing or sculpture, while many other animals and birds and
fish are frequently represented both in picture writing and sculpture.

Kitto notes the fact, however, that from the account of the burial of
Jacob, [58] and from the Song of Moses, [59] it is clear that horsemen
were a part of the Egyptian army, and yet there is but one solitary
specimen of a man on horseback amongst the infinite variety of
sculptured representations of their manner and customs. [60]

Daniel G. Brinton, one of the most competent writers upon the subject,

    There is no doubt but that the horse existed on the continent
    contemporaneously with post-glacial man; and some palaeontologists
    are of opinion that the European and Asian horses were descendants
    of the American species; [61] but for some mysterious reason the
    genus became extinct in the New World many generations before its
    discovery. [62]

May it not be possible that a too great antiquity is claimed for most
of the evidences of the existence of these animals in the western
world? The convictions of Nadaillac, concerning the non-existence of
the horse in America within historical times (and previous to the
Spanish invasion), was well nigh shaken by some of the discoveries of
Charnay. The latter, "in the execution of a mission entrusted to him
by the French government, superintended the excavation of some tumuli,
mountains of rubbish probably, which had covered for many centuries
the relics of the ancient Toltecs"--the native Americans who most
resemble the Nephites, judging from their traditions. One dwelling,
which Charnay unearthed, "consisted of twenty-four rooms, two cisterns,
twelve corridors, and fifteen little staircases of extraordinary
architecture and thrilling interest."

"This is not all," continues Charnay. "In the midst of fragments of
pottery of all kinds, from the coarsest used in building, such as
bricks, tiles, water-pipes, to the most delicate for domestic use,
I have picked up enamels, fragments of crockery and porcelain, and
more extraordinary still, the neck of a glass bottle iridescent like
ancient Roman glass."

    "Amongst the debris," says Nadaillac, "lays the bones of some
    gigantic ruminants (perhaps bisons?), the tibia of which were about
    one foot three inches long by four inches thick, the femur at the
    upper end about six inches by four inches. Admitting that there
    is no mistake, these facts are absolutely new, for previously it
    was considered that the early Americans did not know how to make
    either glass or porcelain, and that before the arrival of the
    Conquistadors (the Conquerors, the Spaniards) none of our domestic
    animals were known in America, but that of the oxen, horses, and
    sheep living there at the present day are all descended from
    ancestors imported from Europe."

    "The excavations have also yielded some little chariots that
    Charnay thinks were the toys of children. Now, supposing these toys
    to have been a reproduction in miniature of objects used by men, we
    must conclude that the Toltecs employed carriages, and that their
    use was not only given up, but absolutely unknown on the arrival
    of Cortes. These discoveries, we can but repeat, greatly modify
    the conclusions hitherto accepted. But are these really original
    productions? May they not have been imported? This is after all
    doubtful, and new proofs are needed to establish certainly that
    the objects discovered really date from the pre-Columbian period
    before we can admit that in the eleventh century the Toltecs
    possessed domestic animals, that they knew how to make and fashion
    porcelain, glass, perhaps even iron, for Charnay also collected in
    his excavations several iron implements. [63]

Priest, in his "American Antiquities," speaks of "a great number of
tracks, as turkeys, bears, horses, and human beings, as perfect as they
could be made on snow or sand," found impressed in the surface of a
solid rock on a certain mountain in the State of Tennessee, situated a
few miles south of Braystown. He says, "that these are the real tracks
of the animals they represent, appears from the circumstance of this
horse's foot having slipped several inches, and recovered again; the
figures having all the same direction, like the trail of a company on a
journey." [64] Referring later to this subject, he says:

    The horse, it is said, was not known in America till the Spaniards
    introduced it from Europe, after the time of its discovery by
    Columbus, which has multiplied prodigiously on the innumerable
    wilds and prairies of both South and North America; yet the track
    of a horse is found on a mountain of Tennessee, in a rock of the
    enchanted mountain, as before related, and shows that horses were
    known in America in the earliest ages after the flood. [65]

The question, then, for the present may be stated thus: The Book of
Mormon positively testifies to the existence, in America, of these
animals in both Jaredite and Nephite times. There have been discovered,
by the researches of men, abundant evidences of the horse's existence
in America, but they claim a very much greater antiquity for that
existence than Book of Mormon times. It must be admitted that the
weight of evidence, though not all the evidence, as it stands at
present, is with those who make such claims; still it may be reasonably
claimed, as for instance in the evidence found by Charnay and referred
to in the passage I have quoted from Nadaillac, that some of the
evidence points to a more recent existence of the horse on the American
continents. Very much more evidence may yet be hoped for on the subject
as explorations shall become more perfect and more extensive.

Relative to other domestic animal