Book of Mormon -- Criticisms

(c) Copyright Michael R. Ash 1996. All rights reserved

Plagiarisms
Sometime between 1809 and 1812 (about twenty years before the Book of Mormon came to press) a Reverend Solomon Spaulding wrote a novel about a group of ancient Roman sailors who were blown of course and landed in America. Spaulding died in 1816 and his manuscript was never published. In 1833, Dr. Philastus Hurlburt, who had recently been excommunicated from the LDS Church for “unchristian-like” conduct toward some young ladies, heard of this manuscript and endeavored to show that Joseph Smith had plagiarized Spaulding's work by turning it into the Book of Mormon. Originally, Hurlburt wished to publish the manuscript, thereby demonstrating that the Book of Mormon was a fraud, but when he read the manuscript, he decided instead to passed the project on to another anti-Mormon, E.D. Howe. Howe published an anti-Mormon book in which he claimed that Joseph Smith plagiarized Spalding when creating the Book of Mormon. According to so-called “witnesses” who had read the manuscript, Spaulding had written about Nephi, Lehi, the Lamanites, and Nephites nearly twenty years before the publication of the Book of Mormon.

The critics claimed that Sidney Rigdon, a convert to the Church, had copied the manuscript and then gave it to Joseph Smith who turned it into the Book of Mormon. The problem, however, is that Rigdon had never heard of the Book of Mormon or its contents until he became a Mormon after 1830. Even many years later, after Rigdon had apostatized from the Church, he denied ever having seen the Book of Mormon until in was introduced to him by the Mormon missionary Parley P. Pratt. In addition, Rigdon had not even been in the vicinity of Spaulding's home until after Spaulding had died and his manuscript hidden away in a trunk where Hurlburt found it.

Somehow the Spaulding manuscript was lost, but nevertheless the enemies of the Church (as well as non-Mormon histories of the LDS Church) continued to claim (for nearly fifty years thereafter) that Spaulding was the real author of the Book of Mormon. Then, in 1884, the manuscript resurfaced in a pile of papers belonging to a man who had bought Howe's business. The Mormons had been right all along, any similarities between Spaulding's manuscript and the Book of Mormon were superficial. Still the critics have not let up, now they claim that Spaulding must have had another manuscript from which the Book of Mormon was taken. Contemporaries of Spaulding, however, mention only one manuscript, and that manuscript has been found (see Bush, 40-69). It's interesting to note that Spaulding's great-granddaughter joined the LDS Church, and has testified her belief that the Book of Mormon is of God (Brown & Brown, 1984, 456).

Most educated anti-Mormons agree that the Spaulding theory is untenable. “‘The usual debater,’ noted the nineteenth-century anti-Mormon writer Davis H. Bays, ‘undertakes to trace the Book of Mormon to the Spaulding romance through Sidney Rigdon. Nothing can be more erroneous, and it will lead to almost certain defeat. The well-informed advocate of Mormonism wants no better amusement than to vanquish an opponent in discussion who takes this ground. The facts are all opposed to this view, and the defenders of the Mormon dogma have the facts well in hand. I speak from experience.... The Spaulding story is a failure. Do not attempt to rely upon it-- it will let you down.’” (Roper, 1992, 85.)

Edward E. Plowman, writer for Christianity Today Magazine: “‘...Mormon archivists have assembled a large amount of evidence-- some of it impressive-- to rebut the Spalding theory. They scored a coup of sorts when they discovered that a manuscript page from another Mormon book, Doctrine and Covenants, is apparently in the same handwriting as that of the Unidentified Scribe in the Book of Mormon manuscript. It is dated June, 1831-- fifteen years after Spalding's death.... The average layman can readily note the striking dissimilarities between Spalding's specimens and the others....’” (Christianity Today, October 21, 1977, pp. 38-39; quoted by Brown & Brown, 1984, 271-2.) Likewise, Jerald & Sandra Tanner (the King & Queen of anti-Mormons) believe that the Spaulding theory is full of holes (Tanner & Tanner, 1977.)

Michael R. Ash

Return to Mormon Fortress