This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.
- CES Letter cherry-picks 34 parallels between View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon. But the differences between these books are very significant.
- CES Letter misquotes and misportrays the content of the two books. For example, they misquote the View of the Hebrews account of Jesus ben Ananias and the Book of Mormon’s account of Samuel the Lamanite to make the two characters sound similar.
- Many of the cherry-picked parallels are unique to the second-edition of View of the Hebrews, which Oliver Cowdery did not have access to–and Joseph Smith certainly didn’t. There was zero mention of Quetzalcoatl or a white bearded god in the first edition, for example.
- CES Letter pretends like View of the Hebrews is a book with stories, like the Book of Mormon is, but really it is a collection of explorer accounts of Native American peoples, and the persuasive case for a Hebrew origin for all Native Americans.
- CES Letter uses present tense grammar in their cherry-picked parallels, as one would do when talking about a story book. But View of the Hebrews was no story book.
- The 34 parallels either rely on false information or fall apart when viewed in context. The View of the Hebrews related some early explorer accounts of Native American peoples, which are true accounts. Thee Book of Mormon tells stories about events that it claims are significant cultural influence on Native Americans. So how would any parallel disprove Joseph Smith’s narrative for the Book of Mormon’s origins? Wouldn’t it strengthen Joseph Smith’s narrative, if early explorer accounts match what is claimed in the Book of Mormon? It’s like claiming at book about birthday cakes is a hoax because it has parallels to some other book on baking.
- Many of the pieces of evidence in View of the Hebrews for the Hebrew origins of American Indians are not mentioned in the Book of Mormon. No mention. If Joseph Smith were influenced by View of the Hebrews, why would Joseph Smith take a few evidences from View of the Hebrews and ignore a bunch of others?
| View of the Hebrews | Book of Mormon | |
| Published: | 1823 | 1830 |
| Location: | Poultney, Vermont | Palmyra, New York |
False – CES Letter incorrectly lists Windsor County, Vermont as the location for the Book of Mormon. They draw a false parallel between the View of the Hebrews and Book of Mormon by noting that Windsor County is adjacent to Rutland County, Vermont. But the Book of Mormon had nothing to do with Windsor County or Rutland County Vermont.
CES Letter notes that Oliver Cowdery lived in Poultney Vermont when the View of the Hebrews was first printed. However, they do not mention that Oliver Cowdery was just a child at this time. They also fail to mention that Oliver Cowdery moved back to New York in 1825, before he could have had a chance to read the second edition of View of the Hebrews. Many of CES Letter‘s alleged parallels are unique to the second edition, such as the white bearded god among the American Indians.
| View of the Hebrews | Book of Mormon | |
| The destruction of Jerusalem: | All references are to the Roman destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD. This is a different event than the Book of Mormon’s references. | All references are to Nebuchadnezzar II’s seige of Jeruslame in 569 BC. This is a different event than the View of the Hebrews references. |
| The scattering of Israel: | View of the Hebrews recites verses from the bible that say Israel would be scattered, and says they would be “wandering to and front over a vast continent between those extreme seas.” | The Book of Mormon mentions tribes being scattered among the isles of the sea, but otherwise makes no mention of wandering or of the people being spread over very vast distances. |
| The restoration of the Ten Tribes: | View of the Hebrews claims that the “Indians of America are the descendants of the ten tribes of Israel,”and that “the ten tribes are to be restored with the Jews in the last days.” The Book of Mormon does not claim this. | The Book of Mormon claims that some Indians of America descended of the Lamanites, who are descended from Manasseh. They are not the lost Ten Tribes. The Book of Mormon says of the Ten Tribes: “whither they are none of us knoweth.” It says “the lost tribes of Israel shall have the words of the Nephites and the Jews,” and the house Israel shall be gathered, but there is no mention of being restored with the Jews. |
| Hebrews leave the Old World for the New World: | View of the Hebrews claims all Native Americans originated from a single large migration over the Bering Strait, “of one origin,” except for some small migrations from Europe via Greenland. This is similar to today’s popular scientific and Anti-Mormon narrative. It also claims they originated from the lost Ten Tribes. “New” and “old” world are described in a modern American context, not regarding the migration of Native Americans. | The Book of Mormon describes multiple small migrations across the sea directly to the Americas. The majority of inhabitants described were the Jaradites, who were not Hebrew. |
| Religion a motivating factor: | A motivating factor for what? Migrating? This is false. There is no mention of religion being a motivating factor for migrations in View of the Hebrews. View of the Hebrews claims the Natives retained a strict Hebrew culture until White explorers arrived. It claims their culture “much degenerated” in a period of “about eighty years.” This is the opposite of the Book of Mormon’s narrative. | The Book of Mormon gives religion as a clear motivation for migrating. It claims the Lamanites degenerated soon after migrating to America, and that the Natives were restored to the truth at the arrival of White settlers. |
| Migrations a long journey: | Well, it is a long journey to the American continent, so obviously the migration was a long journey. The View of the Hebrews relates a Native legend that it was “a year and a half’s journey” to travel to their current location from up North in America. The Ten Tribes’ wandering in the wilderness took many years and was not a single event. | The Book of Mormon does not say how long Nephi’s journey across the ocean took, but it is described as just one event. |
| Encounter “seas” of “many waters”: | The View of the Hebrews says the Ten Tribes “have taken their course between the Black and Caspian seas,” over land via present-day Iran. This is completely different than the migrations described in the Book of Mormon. No sailing. No oceans. It relays a Chepewyan Indian legend that they “traversed a great lake” from a country of ice and snow. There is no mention of “many waters.” | Indeed, Nephi encountered seas during their travel to America, and the Nephites found a land of many waters. Both those are two totally different events. |
| The Americas was an uninhabited land: | The Ten Tribes arrived to an uninhabited land. | The Book of Mormon does not say it was uninhabited. It describes multiple migrations and implies that other migrations happened. The Book of Mormon gives many indications that there were other civilizations already there. So this parallel is false. |
| Settlers journey northward: | This is false. View of the Hebrews claims the Ten Tribes arrived from the north and journeyed southward: “What a striking description is here found of the passing of the natives of this continent, over from the northeast of Asia, to the north-west of America, at Beering’s Straits… it seems the remote natives of Chili (a region 1260 miles south of Peru, in South America)… originated in the same family with the North American Indians.” (View of the Hebrews) | The Book of Mormon claims the Nephites and Lamanites gradually traveled northward over a much smaller distance. |
| Encounter a valley of a great river: | This is false. There is no mentions of valley or rivers, except general discussions of biblical topics such as the Eurphrates river and the “valley of dry bones” in Isaiah. | There is no description of rivers or valleys that in any way relates to anything in the View of the Hebrews. |
| A unity of race (Hebrew) settle the land and are the ancestral origin of American Indians: | This is a repeat of CES Letter‘s earlier paralle. Again, View of the Hebrews claims they originated from a single large migration over the Bering Strait. This is similar to today’s popular scientific and Anti-Mormon narrative. | Again, the Book of Mormon describes multiple small direct migrations, the larger part of which were not Hebrew |
| Hebrew the origin of Indian language: | View of the Hebrews points out similarities between Hebrew of some Native American languages. | This is false. The Book of Mormon claims the Lamanite language changed away from Hebrew. |
| Egyptian hieroglyphics: | This is false. There is no mention of hieroglyphics or the Egyptian language. | The writing peculiar to the gold plates was “reformed” Egyptian hieroglyphics. |
| Lost Indian records: | View of the Hebrews relates an Indian legend that “their ancestors once had the book of God, and then were happy, but that they lost it.” CES Letter claims it talks about “a set of ‘yellow leaves’,” but actually View of the Hebrews talks about “folded leaves of old parchment.” | The Book of Mormon makes no mention of scriptures being prolific among the people, but only mentions the Brass Plates, which was kept private. |
| Breastplate, Urim & Thummim: | The View of the Hebrews relates an explorer account of an Indian priest who wore a religious “breastplate” of sea shells. Another explorer account mentions a priestly breastplate of conch-shell with buck horns attached against it like the Hebrew Urim and Thummim looked. There is no claim of the Indians having access to a Urim and Thummim. | The Book of Mormon describes the Urim and Thummim totally differently. It describes it as two stones attached by metal extending up to the face. There is no mention of any Indians imitating the Urim and Thummim that the Nephites possessed. |
| Prophets, spiritually gifted men transmit generational records: | This is false. There is no mention of prophets or generational records. View of the Hebrews claims the “proper views of God” were “brought down by tradition from their remote ancestors.” | The Book of Mormon claims genealogy was kept. |
| A man standing on a wall warning the people saying, “Wo, wo to this city…to this people” while subsequently being attacked: | View of the Hebrews relates the story of Jesus ben Ananias, who stood on the walls of Jerusalem during the Roman siege of the city and was killed by catapult fire, after years of preaching in the temple. He did not come to “preach for many days” on the wall. He was killed after giving only two sentences. The attack was on Jerusalem, not Jesus ben Ananias | Samuel the Lamanite was a foreigner who appeared out of nowhere. There was no battle going on. He delivered a lengthy sermon while defying many people shooting arrows at him, and is misquoted by CES Letter. Totally different events. |
| The gospel preached in the Americas: | The only mention I could find in View of the Hebrews was the modern-day preaching of “great and generous Christian people, who occupy much of the land of those natives.” Does any Anti-Mormon disagree that modern-day Christians preach the gospel in America? | The Book of Mormon tells of many instances of the gospel being preached in ancient times in America. Totally different events. |
| Quotes who chapters of Isaiah | View of the Hebrews quotes Isaiah, and many other books from the bible, in order to give lengthy commentary on bible teachings, to give observations about how scriptures are being fulfilled, and what they mean. | The Book of Mormon gives little commentary on Isaiah, but just quotes many chapters verbatim, out of the Brass Plates. Totally different purpose of quoting the bible. |
| Good and bad are a necessary opposition: | I do not find anything in View of the Hebrews that teaches this. It appears to be fabricated. The closest thing is a quote from Captain Carver about an Indian tribe that believes in good spirits and bad spirits. | Lehi taught a very profound and complex doctrine of good and evil being in necessary opposition since the garden of Eden. |
| Pride denounced: | View of the Hebrews denounces American Indians for not accepting the Christian gospel: “All the nations of the Indians are exceedingly intoxicated with religious pride, and have an inexpressible contempt of the white people.” | The Book of Mormon prophesies that the Native American people will be open to hearing the gospel from white settlers and will convert to Christianity. Totally different. |
| Polygamy denounced: | View of the Hebrews tells of an explorer account of a tribe that was “so foolish and so wicked, that they would take a number of wives at a time and turn them away at pleasure.” Many other early explorers have observed polygamy among the Native Americans as well. | Forbids polygamy for the Nephite people but makes no mention that they were turning their wives away. |
| Sacred towers and high places: | There is zero mention of sacred towers or high places in the Americas. View of the Hebrews does describe towers as part of a large and intricate palace complex, but CES Letter talks about this in a later alleged parallel, so what exactly are they referring to here? | Towers were built in high places as fortifications from attack and to herald the ‘Title of liberty.’ |
| Messiah visits the Americas: | View of the Hebrews quotes an account by explorer Alexander De Humbolt regarding the god Quetzalcoatl, and remarks: “Who could this be but Moses, the ancient legislator of Israel?” There is zero mention of Jesus or a Messiah visiting the Americas. It was supposedly Moses. This hoax parallel with the Book of Mormon started with Fawn M. Brodie’s No Man Knows My History. She claimed: “Ethan Smith described Quetzalcoatl as ‘a type of Christ’.” This is false. He described “the mediation of Moses as a type of Christ.” CES Letter misquotes View of the Hebrews as talking about a “Mexican Messiah.” There is zero mention of this. | The Book of Moromon describes Jesus visiting the Nephites, coming down from the heavens. |
| Idolatry and human sacrifice: | “Idolatry” is described as “the irregular worship of Jehovah.” There is no mention of them worshipping actual physical idols, but just going generally apostate from the gospel. View of the Hebrews claims that the American Indians went apostate only very recently, when white explorers arrived. The only mention of human sacrifice is from an account of an explorer who says the Indians “have abandoned the practice of human sacrifice.” So it is actually claiming there wasn’t human sacrifice. | The Book of Mormon claims the Nephites and Lamanites in the Americas went idolatrous a long time ago and worshipped physical idols, and claims they practiced human sacrifice. |
| Hebrews divided into two classes, civilized and barbarous: | This is false. The only mention of classes among the Hebrews or Natives is an observation that among the Cherokees “there is a class… whose lodges are sacred as respects the stranger.” View of the Hebrews observes that in the ancient Americas “barbarous hordes invaded their more civilized brethren.” There is no mention of classes or divisions, but just the general observation that barbarions invade other civilizations. Why does CES Letter frame it as a class oppression issue? | The Book of Mormon describes complex social structures of classes of people. |
| Civilized thrive in art, written language, metallurgy, navigation: | View of the Hebrews quotes the American Antiquarian Society in observing that the American Indians “possessed the art of working metals.” They quote another author: “The Mexicans have preserved a particular relish for painting.” As for “written language,” this is a repeat of CES Letter‘s claim of Lost Indian Records. But View of the Hebrews claims their knowledge of writing was long ago lost, that there was a “loss of the knowledge of letters, of the art of navigation, and of the use of iron.” It does not claim that they “thrive” in these arts, but that they no longer existed at all. | The Book of Mormon mentions metallurgy, navigation, and writing, but makes no claim that this knowledge was lost. We can deduce that some of it was likely lost, which is archaeology has also confirmed. |
| Government changes from monarchy to republic: | False. There is no mention of a republic government or society. View of the Hebrews claims the American Indians had a “theocratic-patriarchal” government, and a “succcession of twelve monarchies.” There is no mention of judges, representatives, a shift in government, or elected leaders. Nothing having to do with democracy. Why does CES Letter shift the issue to democracy? | The Book of Mormon records a shift in Nephite government from monarchy to elected representatives. |
| Civil and ecclesiastical power is united in the same person: | View of the Hebrews quotes explorer M. Humbolt, who said ancient American royal princes embodied a “union of the civil and ecclesiastical power,” typical for ancient civilizations. | Nephi was both king and religious leader, but the powers were separated quickly afterward, such as King Mosiah vs. Alma. Boy, that would be terrible, wouldn’t it? Having the same man be a civil and ecclesiastical leader? Now why would Anti-Mormons be outraged to read about that….? |
| Long wars break out between the civilized and barbarous: | There is no mention of how long the wars lasted. View of the Hebrews only claims that the barbarous hordes invaded the more civilized tribes. This is a repeat of CES Letter‘s earlier phony parallel, that there were two classes of people in View of the Hebrews. | The Book of Mormon describes complex wars and battles between all kinds of people. |
| Extensive military fortifications, observations, “watch towers”: | View of the Hebrews describes towers as part of a large and intricate palace complex, as observed by explorers. | Towers were built in high places as fortifications from attack and to herald the ‘Title of liberty.’ |
| Barbarous exterminate the civilized: | This is the third time CES Letter repeats their phony parallel that there were two classes of people in View of the Hebrews. Still not true. Why are they so obsessed with class oppression? View of the Hebrews observes that in the ancient Americas, “barbarous hordes invaded their more civilized brethren, and eventually annihilated most of them.” This is a general observation that barbarions invade other civilizations. This is a true observation about tribes in the Americas, as well as most ancient history for any continent. | In the Book of Mormon, the Nephites–after they become barbarous themselves–are completely exterminated by the Lamanites in open battle. It is not civilized versus barbarous classes. |
| Discusses the United States: | A history book about America discusses the United States? Wow. Shocking. I just can’t believe it. | There is a prophesy in the Book of Mormon about Columbus and the founding fathers, but it is totally different than any of the discussions in the View of the Hebrews. |
| Ethan/Ether: | The first name of the author of View of the Hebrew is Ethan. | Ether was a Jaradite prophet. So? |
Misquotes Samuel the Lamanite – Many of the claims about View of the Hebrews are false, and some of the claims about the Book of Mormon are false. CES Letter misquotes View of the Hebrews about Jesus ben Ananias. CES Letter misquotes Samuel the Lamanite as well. CES Letter alters the quotes slightly to make them sound similar.
| Jesus ben Ananias | Samuel The Lamanite | |
| CES Letter misquote: | “Wo, wo to this city… to this people.” | “Wo, wo to this city” or “this people”. |
| Correct quote: | “Wo, wo to this city, this temple, and this people!” | “12. Yea, wo unto this great city of Zarahemla… 15. Yea, and wo be unto the city of Gideon… 24. Yea, wo unto this people, because of this time which has arrived…” |
Oliver Cowdery Connection To View Of The Hebrews?
CES Letter misquotes the View of the Hebrews about the bearded god Quetzalcoatl: he was not called a “Mexican Messiah.”
CES Letter present tense to make View of the Hebrews sound like a story book instead of a historical record. “Scattering of Israel.” “Pride denounced.” Gee, two religious books just happen to denounce pride and talk about Israel? Shocking! Many parallels are unique to second edition, which Oliver Cowdery could not have had access to, so how would Joseph Smith have read about them?
“Reverend Ethan Smith was the author of View of the Hebrews… Oliver Cowdery – also a Poultney, Vermont resident – was a member of Ethan’s congregation during this time and before he went to New York to join his cousin (third cousins) Joseph Smith.”
(CES Letter)
Both Books Relate American Indians & Bible – The reason why some loose parallels exist is because View of the Hebrews recognized that American Indians had something to do with the Hebrews, and this is something the Book of Mormon explains in detail. “Extensive military fortifications” and “idolatry” are natural observations that many people made about the Native Americans, and multiple explorers pointed out the Natives’ parallels to Hebrews. The View of the Hebrews quotes multiple early explorers to point out unique traits that the Book of Mormon happens to explain.
Why doesn’t CES Letter list every single theme and element mentioned in both books and them compare them? Instead, they cherry-pick 34 things? Wouldn’t the scientific thing be to compare everything instead of a few cherry-picked things?
See also: View of the Hebrews: An Unparallel
CES Letter Logical Fallacies
| Falsehood | CES Letter incorrectly lists Sharon, Vermont as the location of the 1830 Book of Mormon. This is false. Joseph Smith was born in Vermont, but the Book of Mormon was first published in Palmyra New York, a good distance away. Many of these parallels are just false. The Messiah did not visit the Americas in View of the Hebrews. Quetzalcoatl was not the Messiah in that book. The CES Letter claim that B.H. Robert’s research into the parallels between the books was “private,” “meant only for the eyes of the First Presidency,” and “never intended to be available to the public” is totally false. |
| Cherry-picking | CES Letter cherry-picks a handful of very loose parallels and arranges them on a chart to suggest very specific coincidences. One after another, each “parallel” is skewed and twisted. Anyone can cherry-pick a few idiosyncrasies that were common 200 years ago and draw a conspiracy theory relationship between the two random books. In a study, Jeff Lindsay found many striking parallels between the book Leaves of Grass and the Book of Mormon. Only problem? The Book of Mormon was published 20 years earlier. |
| Confirmation Bias | The “parallels” ignore wildly different contexts between the two books. Most similarities are because both happen to reference the bible and Native Americans together. |
| Guilt By Association | Oliver Cowdery was a small child when he lived in Ethan Smith’s (author of View of the Hebrews) home town. There is no evidence Joseph Smith had anything to do with Ethan Smith’s book. CES Letter implies Joseph Smith may have come across the book because he lived kinda close and there are kinda some parallels. CES Letter arranges the “parallels” to deceptively invent a relationship. CES Letter stresses alleged parallels having to do with racism: “A unity of race,” “two classes, civilized and barbarous,” “Barbarous exterminate the civilized.” This isn’t really how either book frames things. CES Letter frames it this way to incriminate the Book of Mormon as racist. |
Fake Science – In previous arguments, CES Letter demanded that Mormons validate every single thing mentioned in the Book of Mormon with plentiful physical evidence, or our narrative must be false. But now, CES Letter shifts the goalposts and cherry-picks a few loose parallels to some other book that happens to mention Hebrew influences on the Native American. Why shouldn’t CES Letter have to validate every single comparison, if that narrative is true? Wouldn’t that be scientific?
One of the Book of Mormon’s strengths is its consistent originality of themes, stories, theology, and geography. By constraining the context of the argument, swinging back and forth between too much contradiction to too little contradiction, CES Letter makes this clownish argument sound almost reasonable, almost scientific.
CES Letter thus ignores context and sets a restricted frame for how Joseph Smith produced the Book of Mormon, which by all appearances is a miracle. How did a 14 year old boy come up with such imaginative themes? Easy. He stole it. CES Letter cherry-picks a few bits of evidence and frames it in a way that almost sounds plausible, by ignoring tons of inconvenient facts to support their wild and complicated narrative. They build a narrative how Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon as an imaginative work of fiction, like the Captain Kidd dime novels which they incorrectly claim Joseph Smith read as a kid.
Logically, shouldn’t this be an argument in support of the Book of Mormon? Think about it. If the Hebrews were really an influence that migrated into ancient America, shouldn’t someone else besides the Mormons noticed the similarities? Shouldn’t history books have mentioned something? Well it turns out they did. Many people did, especially early Spanish explorers, but for some reason we don’t hear about it in history classes today. Why do you think that is? CES Letter goes back and forth between claims that the Book of Mormon is too similar or too contradictory to other books. It is too contradictory to the bible, and now it is too similar to this other random book.
| See also: | CES Letter Contradiction Strategy |
Contradiction Strategy – Like before, CES Letter uses a member of the Mormon church to attack the church. The attack is always more powerful when it comes from a member, which is why anti-Mormons so often pretend to be faithful latter day saints and sow dissension inside the church. B.H. Roberts, no less! This appeals subtly to the bandwagon fallacy, where we get the impression that all the smart people in the church are changing their minds about its truthfulness. We think, “Even the leaders on my side are pointing out the contradictions! I must really have it wrong.” This tactic also insulates the anti-Mormons from counter-attacks from faithful Mormons, because it is not them saying these things, why, it is the Mormon experts admitting it. B. H. Roberts!
The human mind is trained to find patterns and dissimilarities. It is easy–lazy really–to cherry-pick a few vague similarities between two random books, dress up the language to sound more similar, and build a narrative that one book derived from the other. This is the same argument that Leftists use against the bible. They say it was ripped off Babylonian, Sumerian, and Egyptian legends. The human brain is trained to look for discrepancies and patterns, so this trick is common. Pareidolia is why people see the Virgin Mary in breakfast cereal and figures on Mars. It is confirmation bias.
When it comes to history, there is so much we don’t know and will never know. All we have are some fragments of bones in the ground and some texts that claim to be ancient. Fools jump to conclusions. Followers of Satan are easily tricked when it comes to pareidolia and history, because they are lazy and do not care to use critical thought. If there is vague evidence for something but we mostly don’t know what really happened because it is ancient history, followers of Satan will jump to lazy conclusions, whatever narrative is hyped on the History Channel and dressed up in emotional language.
What does CES Letter believe in? What tenant of faith do hold that we can verify or discredit with these kinds of comparisons? Global warming? Human evolution? Give us something! Why don’t anti-Mormons discuss their alternative belief to the beliefs of the Book of Mormon and bible, and talk about physical evidences? Instead, they nit-pick and tear down an entire belief system with unscientific appeals to fake science.
This propaganda technique is especially insidious as it defines Mormons in a constrained and unfair frame, and it rallies non-Mormons or anybody who was sitting on the fence in solidarity against Mormons and their beliefs.Complete answers to CES Letter questions about Mormons: