Hardy, John. Hypocrisy Exposed, or J.V. Himes Weighed in the Balances of Truth, Honesty and Common Sense, and Found Wanting; Being a Reply to a Pamphlet put forth By Him Entitled Mormon Delusions and Monstrosities, 3–12. Boston: Albert Morgan, 1842.
It is a matter of history, that when any great reform or revelation of moral and religious truth is instituted or made, a bigoted priesthood and corrupt bodies of religionists are the first, to array against it the whole artillery of their sects, and to cry aloud and unceasingly, Crucify it!
Crucify it! They well know, that the success of such new truths will, sooner or later, result in the overthrow of their long cherished dogmas; and hence the continual flow of falsehood, misrepresentation and slander which is poured out upon such doctrines. The Church of Latter Day Saints has suffered much of this injustice and persecution, and the writer of this, knowing full well that the elders of this Church cannot be expected to turn aside from their great work, and reply to every effusion of the workers of unrighteousness; and feeling that every member of the church is capable of understanding and setting forth the truth, as it is in Christ Jesus, proposes in this pamphlet to weigh the statements, put forth by J. V. Himes, and see if they can stand the investigation of truth.
A few weeks previous to the issuing of his pamphlet, the publisher, Mr. Himes, very appropriately opened his exterminating campaign against the Latter Day Saints, by preaching a discourse from Mark xvi, 17—18 v.—”These signs shall follow those that believe; In my name they shall cast out Devils, they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them—they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” After laboring very assiduously to prove that Christ lied, when he made this declaration, and that these signs do not, and will not follow the believer, he then announced, that in a short time he should issue a work, that would be a sure remedy for those infected with Mormonism, and would completely rout its deluded followers, as had been the case, through his instrumentality, before. As might be expected, there was some anxiety on the part of the Saints.
They concluded, however, to leave the city, when they did go, of their own free will, and not at the instance or threat of J. V. Himes. They were not alarmed, for they had heard him talk before, and were convinced that his notorious eccentricities, his falling in with every foolish delusion of the age offered no guaranty, that his attempt in the present case, would savor much of common sense, or true scripture interpretation. [3]
In the course of time the work came forth from the press, and behold “a mountain labored and brought forth a mouse.” Any one can see from perusing this gentleman’s productions, that he is anything but an author, being entirely destitute of those faculties, which constitute originality.
He gets his books through the press, made up almost exclusively of the writings of others, and puts his name to the title page as Compiler, Editor and Publisher. And such is this man’s love of notoriety, that he will republish works under his name, that the actual author refuses to own. The cover of the present book is bordered with quotations from the New Testament, respecting false prophets &c., quotations which Mr. Himes has learned by heart since his connection with the ‘43 mania, and which he has applied successfully to Papists, Universalists and Mahometans; and now forsooth they mean Mormons; and after 1843, Mr. Himes will find to his everlasting shame and disgrace that he is the false prophet after all. On the back of the cover is a quotation from 2 Thess. ii. Chap. 9, 12 verses, where Paul is giving the character of the man of sin. Now Himes and Miller have both often declared (when endeavoring to prove the 1843 doctrine,) that “The man of sin” here, was fulfilled in the Pope of Rome, and was the same as the little horn of Daniel; but now Himes is endeavoring to overthrow Mormonism, and he strikes up another tune.
The scene is changed, and behold Paul’s “man of sin” means Joseph Smith, or Mormonism, or any thing else, so that Himes can get up a book.
This work contains ninety pages, thirty-eight of which are borrowed or stolen from a work of A. Campbell, of Bethany, Va., published about eleven years ago, and which Himes has republished once before in Boston. He has culled forty-six pages out of a work entitled “Mormonism Exposed,” a work which carries so much absurdity on the face of it, and confutes its own argument with such ease, that the author is ashamed to put his name to it. Thus a child disowned by its natural father, on account of its notorious wickedness, finds a Godfather in J. V. Himes. Mr. Himes will father almost any thing, to get his name on the title page of a book. Four pages of this book are occupied by Mr. Himes himself, as a preface, which commences thus;
“The scriptures assure us, that in the last days false prophets and false preachers shall arise; But mark, there is no promise of any true prophets, as such. All that pretend to be prophets of the last times, are false ones, pretend what they may.” As an offset to this assertion of Mr. Himes, we will quote the prophecy of Joel, as used by Peter, in [*unreadable in copy*] of Acts, 17—18.
“And it shall come to pass in the last days, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophecy, &c.; and on my servants and handmaids I will pour out of my spirit, and they shall prophecy.
Thus it will be seen, that Mr. Himes positively asserts, that there is no promise of any true prophets in the last days, and that all pretended prophets of the last time are false; while Joel says just as positively, that in the last days, our sons and daughters, servants and handmaids, shall prophecy,—a complete contradiction; judge ye who tells the truth. Also Paul in the 2d of Cor. xii chap., 28th verse, says, “And God hath set some in the church; first, Apostles, second, Prophets, third, Teachers; after that, miracles, gifts of healing, &c.” Now Mr. Himes, has your flock, as you call it, any prophets? if not, it is not the church of Christ. Look at the 4th of Eph. 11th verse, “and he gave some, Apos- [4] tles, and some, Prophets, and some, Evangelists, &c., for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ—till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” Thus according to Paul, Prophets were to continue in the church, till we all come in the unity of the faith, unto the measure of the fullness of Christ. Has this all taken place yet? if not, there certainly should be Prophets in the church. Also, 1st Thess. v, 20 Paul says, “Despise not prophecyings.”—again, 1st Cor. xiv—39.
“Wherefore brethren covet to prophecy.” Thus it will be seen, that there is not only direct prophecy, assuring us that there shall be many prophets in the “last days,” but if there is any truth in the saying of the Apostle, the office of prophets is indispensably connected with the organization of Christ’s church; and John says, “he that transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.” And as Mr. Himes positively denies the existence of true prophets in the last days, we must either conclude, there is no church of Christ on earth, or that Mr. Himes “has not God.” Thus after denying the word of God in this emphatic manner, he has the hardihood to talk of “giving heed to doctrines of devils,” “and denying the Lord, &c.” It might well be said of Mr. Himes, “Physician heal thyself.”
Another instance of the treachery of Himes’ memory will be seen by his making the latter day saints the false prophets and miracle workers of the last days. For Christ says, these false prophets “shall show great signs and wonders:” And John says “these miracle workers shall have power to do these things,” to that degree, that they shall cause fire to come down from heaven to the earth in the sight of men.” Then Mr. Himes goes on to prove, that the Mormons have not power to do these things; they only pretend to this power, and also instead of doing these things in the sight of men, (as they were to do,) they did them all in a corner before a privileged few.
Thus it will be seen that Mr. Himes proves a great deal too much. The preface also says, “they (the Mormons,) come to the people as professed believers in christianity, they preach what they know will take, as a general thing, with experimental and pious christians.” So Mr. Himes, it is not the ignorant ungodly professor, that is pleased with the doctrine preached by the Mormons, but the experienced and pious christian.” Well, Joshua tells the truth in this one instance. Verily his memory must have proved treacherous again. Now if Mr. Himes preached the doctrine that would take with experimental and pious believers, he would not be under the necessity of publishing a book to keep the experimental and pious portion of his society, from investigating Mormonism for themselves. The fact is, the pious portion of his society are tired of feeding on husks; and like the Prodigal, are seeking their father’s house, where there is bread enough and to spare; and the honest in heart will come out of Mr. Himes’ Babylon. The more he lashes them; the more they will hunger for the bread of life.
But some may ask, what is the doctrine the Mormons preach that suits the pious believer so well? I will answer briefly. They preach faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance from dead works, baptism for the remission of sins, and laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Ghost; see Heb. xi, 1, 2; Also, Acts ii, 38, and vii 17, and xix, 6, and xxii, 16. They preach that when Christ said “these [5] signs shall follow them that believe,” he told the truth; see Mar. xvi, 17, 18. They preach that God is just as willing and able to raise up the sick by the prayer of faith, in 1842, as in the first century; see James v, 14, 15. They believe and preach, that Christ’s church, wherever found, will be organized as in the first century, and blessed with the same gifts and blessings; see 1st Cor. xii.; also, Eph. iv, 11, 14. They “contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints;” see Heb. xi. They not only have the form of Godliness, but earnestly contend for the power thereof; even to the healing of the sick.
This is a very brief outline of some of the doctrines preached by the “Latter Day Saints,” which Mr. Himes says, takes so well with the experimental and pious believer; and it will also be seen, by the readers of his book, that these doctrines are nearly all denied emphatically, by J. V. Himes, although so satisfactory to the minds of the pious and experimental christian. And here let it be remembered by all of Mr. Himes’ deluded followers, that he does not undertake to refute the doctrine, as preached and believed by the Latter Day Saints; and he dare not do it. Mr. Himes knows it would not do, although the gospel thus preached, with its ordinances, by them, differ as much from that taught by him, as light differs from darkness. Mr. Himes has also been invited, again and again, to come to our meetings, and expose Mormonism, but, as has just been intimated, he dare not undertake it.
Mr. Himes then speaks of a certain “hook,” but is very careful not to describe it. He then goes on to speak of G. W. Bruce, who, he says, was offered an Elder-ship, if he would preach Mormonism, and he calls, him “Br. G. W. Bruce, a respectable member of my flock.” With what honeyed words, he speaks of Mr. Bruce, when Mormonism is concerned! How long is it, Mr. Himes, since I heard you say, you had no fellowship, or sympathy, with any man, that believed the literal restoration of Israel, and that no living christian would believe in the doctrine. If half the hard epithets you have bestowed upon judyisers were gathered, and heaped upon Mr. Bruce, he would exclaim “save me from my respected friends.” And as respected as G. W. Bruce is by you, he is not allowed to advance his views on the prophecies, even in the meetings of his own church. But you say the bait did not take with Bruce. Why do you not tell the reason Mr. Himes? why so modest, all at once? why not tell the same story you told me, and let Mr. Bruce know that he owes his salvation from Mormonism, entirely to one J. V. Himes. You told me, had it not been for you, Nickerson would have had him, sure. How is it Mr. Himes, you cannot save him from judyism? You have saved him once; try it again, for he has swallowed judysim, bait, hook and all: and as Mr. Bruce was not capable of investigating Mormonism for himself, according to Mr. Himes, I would advise Mr. Bruce to apply to Mr. Himes, and see if his views on the restoration of Isreal are correct. So much for Mr. Bruce.
Mr. Himes then says, several poor simpletons have been ordained Elders. This is false; there has been only one Elder ordained to this office, in Boston. Again, he says, “Another made of deception is by the pretence of working miracles.” This is falsehood number two. They pretend no such thing; but that God is the same, yesterday, today and forever, and answers the prayers of faith; see Mat. xviii, 19. He then goes on to name some cures, which the prayers faith have [6] accomplished in the church in Boston, but says, “As it happens all these things are done in a corner.” This is falsehood number three. Not one of them has ever been done in the corner, or [*unreadable in copy*] but God has manifested himself by his healing power, in several instances, in public meetings. Also he says, “They do not pretend [*unreadable in copy*] any but such as have entire faith;” although he goes on to state a case, where they pretended to heal an infant. What poor memory Mr. Himes must have. Now, although Christ said he could not do any mighty works in a certain place, because of their unbelief, and declared to those that applied to him, “according to your faith be it unto you;” and again “without faith it is impossible to please God.” Yet according to this reasoner, “Latter Day Saints,” must heal in every instance, faith or no faith. Oh! Mr. Himes, how art thou fallen—how hast thy gold become dim, and thy fine gold changed? How hath the delusion of the ‘43 doctrine blinded thine eyes, in regard to the fundamental truths of the word of God.
Mr. Himes then proceeds to account for these cures in a natural manner, viz: the power of the imagination, &c., and relates some cases of this character. Thus it will be seen that Mr. Himes and Dr. Collyer, are “hail fellows well met” on this subject. The Doctor says, Christ healed the blind man by magnetizing him, also the woman that touched the hem of his garment, and Daniel magnetized the lions, &c. Thus, the Doctor accounts for ancient miracles in a natural manner, viz: by magnetism, and Mr; Himes accounts for modern miracles in a natural menner, viz: imagination. The Doctor denies the miraculous power of God in all ages of the world. Mr. Himes denies it in the last days—thus fulfilling the scriptures, which declare “they shall have a form of Godliness, but deny the power.” And yet Mr. Himes has the glaring hypocrisy to enter the pulpit and read notes that have been sent in, requesting him to pray that God would heal such and such persons, that are sick. And Mr. Himes will pray with as much grace, aud apparent sincerity for God to heal them, as though he actually believed the days of miracles were not past.
What blasphemous hypocrisy! Mr. Himes then goes on to enumerate some other cures, of which he had received information from a hypocrite by the name of Bishop, connected with the Miller delusions, who came to us with a long face, pretending he wished to be healed, and opened his neck to show us a humour, &c. We gave him the information he so much desired; although he did not deceive us, for we told him of his hypocrisy on the spot. And after catching him in a falsehood, he went his way not much wiser, to report to Mr. Himes.
Again he says, have the Mormons ever called back the spirit to a body that has been “dead four days, and stinketh.” Why in the first place, Mr. Himes calls us knaves, fools and false prophets, for believing those things are done, which are actually promised by Christ, when he said “these signs shall follow the believer,” which signs do not include raising the dead; neither is the raising of the dead enumerated among the spiritual gifts which compose the church, the body of Christ; which may be seen in xii chap. of 1st Cor. However, this only shows Mr. Himes to be of the same class of scoffers that said to Christ, “come down from the cross and we will believe on you,”—”he saved others—himself he cannot save,” although he had done much more before their eyes, than the prophets had promised. Abraham told the rich man if [7] his brethren would not believe the Law and the Prophets, neither would they believe if one should rise from the dead.” And it is just so with Mr. Himes as he says these signs shall not follow the believer, and also denies the spiritual gifts that God set in his church; and thus makes God a liar; neither would he believe if one were raised that had been dead four days, and stinketh. Let not Mr. Himes talk of raising the dead, until he can believe that God can heal the sick, and that instantaneously, through the prayer the faith, and anointing with oil; as recommended by James v, 14. Finally, Mr. Himes says, that they (the Mormons,) “threaten all who refuse to receive the Mormon doctrine, with eternal damnation.’—This is falsehood number four. They threaten no one with eternal damnation, and Mr Himes is challenged to prove his statement. Thus it will be seen that he has a falsehood to every page of his preface. And provided they did so threaten, it is not so bad as the position of Mr. Himes and his associates, who believe, that all who do not assent to the doctrine, that the world will be destroyed in the year 1813, will be eternally damned.
I will now endeavor to give a few specimens of the many misrepresentations, false quotations, and slanders which may be found in the two aged works; viz: Campbell’s and Sunderland’s, which Mr. Himes has adopted into his family, and by this adoption, or publishing these things, he has proved himself either a falsifier, or a dishonest man; for if he examined the works of the “Latter Day Saints,” for himself, then the lies and misrepresentations made concerning those works, must be laid at his door—and if he has published these things without examining for himself, when he could have had easy access to all our books, then he is certainly, to say the least, a dishonest man. And here I will give one of Mr. Himes’ lamentations on the same subject, which may be found in the “Signs of the Times,” vol. iii, no. 1, page 6, a paper edited by Mr. Himes. It reads thus: “The religious press were ready to publish any thing they could find against us. (Millerites.) All sorts of stories about Miller and the views he advocates have a ready place in their columns. In their quotations, from books on this subject, they make such selections as are calculated to bring us into the greatest contempt, and thereby endeavor to destroy our influence among the people.” Now Mr. Himes has done precisely the same things in regard to the “Latter Day Saints,” in every particular, and ten times worse as I shall proceed to prove, by first showing some of his false quotations from our books. He quotes from the Book of Mormon, 53[?] page, thus: “Take heed that none be baptised without telling their experience, nor partake of the sacrament unworthily.” It reads thus “See that ye are not baptised unworthily, see that ye partake not of the sacrament of Christ unworthily,”—not a syllable about telling experience. Again on page 22, he says, John is made to baptise in the village of Bethabara. It reads thus: “He should baptise in Bethabara beyond Jordan;” thus harmonising with John’s Gospel, 1st chap. 2d verse, and not a word said about village. Again, he makes the 240 p. say Jesus was born in Jerusalem, when the passage reads “at Jerusalem, the land of our forefathers.”
He speaks of the Mariner’s Compass and Steamboats; but the book of Mormon speaks of no such things. Once more the “Voice of warning” is quoted, page 179, thus: “America is a chosen land of the Lord, above every other land, it is the place of the New Jerusalem which has come down from God, out [8] of heaven, upon the earth.” While the actual reading is this: “America is a chosen land of the Lord, above every other land, it is the place of the New Jerusalem, which shall come down from God out of heaven, upon the earth, when renewed. The foregoing are only specimens of the lies and misrepresentations, to which Mr. Himes has become God-father, by publishing his book. And this is the course he takes to put down Mormonism. Query, will he succeed? or will he that digs a pit, fall into it himself? We shall see. But one thing I know,—a man that is guilty of such wickedness as the above, would do what I saw Mr. Himes do, in a religious meeting of believers of the 1843 doctrine, viz: offer for sale a gold chain, saying, he had been offered six and a quarter dollars for it, for old gold, but, says he, if any of the friends present want such an article, they can have it for seven dollars and a half. A man who would do that, and, at the same time, be preaching Christ’s coming in 1843 to destroy the earth, and with it all who do not believe in Christ’s coming at that time, would not hesitate at any Monstrosity.
Another silly and ridiculous objection which is brought against the Book of Mormon by these men, which is harped on a great deal by Mr. Himes, and which shows his ignorance and inconsistency, is concerning the Priesthood; see 26th and 28th pages of Mr. Himes’ book; the 27th page reads thus; “Smith, its real author, as ignorant and as impudent a knave (what meek expressions for a ‘43 man,) as ever wrote a book, betrays the cloven foot, in basing his whole book upon a false fact, (a curious animal,) or a pretended fact, which makes God a liar, viz: with the Jews, God made a covenant at Mount Sinai, and instituted a Priesthood, and a high Priesthood. The priesthood he gave to the tribe of Levi, and the high priesthood to Aaron and his sons, for an everlasting priesthood.” And according to these mens’ assertions, “Smith is as ignorant a knave as ever wrote a book.” And why, because the Book of Mormon states, that the descendants of Joseph could offer gifts acceptable before God, when the law of Moses was in force, and the command implicitly ordered all the tribes of Israel to bring their offerings unto the tribe of Levi, for the covenant of Priesthood was confirmed upon them for an everlasting covenant. Let us take a retrospective view of the priesthood of Levi and Aaron, and also of the priesthood which the descendants of Joseph had, when wanderers from the land of their nativity.
What, says one, another priesthood different from the Levitical order;” yes, kind reader; but do not start. I will show you that Campbell and Himes are the “ignoramuses,” or “knaves,” after all, and not Joseph Smith. As it appears, they have not read the scriptures, and investigated this subject with due consideration, but have condemned without proof, and inserted their opinions without an investigation of the holy writ. Paul informs us that the Levitical “Law was added because of transgression,” and it consisted, or “stood only in meats, and drinks, and divers washings, imposed on them, until the times of reformation. And if it was “added because of transgression,” I would ask what was it added to, or what had the children of Israel transgressed, for where no law is, there is no transgression. Now, Mr. Himes, as you are perfectly ignorant on this subject, I will answer this question for you, and for that purpose we will refer to the testimony, Heb. 4, 22, viz: “The Gospel was preached unto them, as well as unto us, but the word preached did not profit [9] them &c.” And the law was given unto them, to be a school master to bring them unto Christ,” viz: the carnal law which consists of meats, drinks &c. But before that was given, high priests were ordained to offer gifts, as Paul informs us, Heb. 8, 3; “for every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices.” Was Abel an high priest; if he was not, his offering would have been non-essential, as high priests offer gifts unto God; it was by faith, that Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain; but to pass on to Abraham, did he offer gifts that were well pleasing in the sight of God? read Gen. 22, 13.
Also observe the sayings recorded in Gen. xiv, 18, 20, concerning Melchesideck being priest of the most High God, who also blessed Abraham at a certain time; whoever will take pains to read Genesis, will find that the patriarchs offered gifts unto the Most High. A priest of On is spoken of in Gen. xii, 20; and Moses kept the flocks of Jethro, priest of Midian, Ex. iii, 1.
And I would recommend my readers to examine closely the xviii of Exodus, and see the authority that was vested in the hands of Jethro, and the counsel he gave to Moses, exhorting him how to proceed with the children of Israel. And as Moses would “rather suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, esteeming the reproaches of Christ, (what talk about Christ, so long-ago as that; why Moses will beranked with the ignorant Smith!) greater riches than the treasurers of Egypt.” And thus as he took upon him the name of Christ, he was commissioned by the Most High to lead the captives of Isreal out of the land of bondage. So Moses was head of the priesthood, Aaron not excepted. Examine Ex. 28, 1, where a command is given unto Moses to take Aaron and his sons that they might minister in the priest’s office, (not to create a new office,) and if there was no office of priest before Aaron and his sons was called, how does it come to pass, that God promised to make them a kingdom of priests not of the priesthood of Levi, for that was after the law of carnal commandments, and was only intrusted with one tribe to remain with them until the times of reformation; but the priesthood that all Isreal should have, was forever after the order of the Son of God. And with all the ignorant zeal that Campbell and Himes are possessed of, and mens’ wisdom, can they tell us how the whole tribes of the children of Isreal, are to become a kingdom of priests, a holy nation, Ex. xix, 6. And as they cannot show from scripture that all the tribes of Isreal are, or will be entrusted with the Levitical prieshood; so they deny that the order of Melchesideck, of which the Saviour was a priest, Psalms x, 4, was the order of priesthood entrusted unto Lehigh and his sons, when they offered their gifts unto the Most High. The ignoramus Himes would gladly make us believe this to be a new order—but not so kind reader, but the same order that was entrusted to Abel, Seth, Enoch, &c.; was it new then? Nay verily; but was as ancient as the Son of God. But stop; you are too fast, says another. From the days of the Leviticol priesthood, no person had authority to offer gifts unto God or to build altars to his name, except those of the tribe of Levi. Hence Jesus himself was excluded from officiating as priest on earth according to the law. True, but what law? why the law of carnal commandments, Heb. vii, 11. If, therefore, perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people receive the law,) what further need was there, that another priest should arise after the order of Melchesideck. The [10] need was this; the time of reformation had come, and as the Saviour was of the tribe of Judah, of which Moses spoke nothing concerning the priesthood, yet, says Paul, “the priesthood being changed, there must needs be a change of the law;” Heb. vii, 12.
But to be concise, let us go back to the days of the Judges, Kings and Prophets of Isreal, when the Levitical law was in force, and there was no change of priesthood; and it will be seen, according to the logic of these modern reasoners, who have labored with such energy to overthrow the Book of Mormon, with its translator, that they reject many of the old prophets, and set them down as liars and impostors, as they have done Lehigh and his sons. We will now turn a few more leaves in search of truth, in that book of books. And we shall first see Sampson and his father Manoah, of the family of Dan, (not of Levi,) who offered acceptable offerings before the Lord, who stood by, after the kid was killed and laid upon the rock, when the flavour went up unto heaven, from off the altar, and the Angel of the Lord ascended in the flavour. Now I ask what priesthood had Manoah? Levitical? Jud. xii, 19, 20. What a pity he did not know how, and when to offer his offering, for according to the logic of Campbell and Himes, his doom is cast, and he must be damned with all Mormon prophets. Also Gideon, of the tribe of Manassah, who offered acceptable offerings, and threw down the altars of Baal and erected another unto the Lord, Jud. vi, 25, 26. Again, Samuel of the tribe of Ephraim, Elijah the Tishbite, Elisha and Isaiah, with David of the tribe of Judah, and many others, who offered their gifts and offerings unto the Lord, who smiled upon them, and blessed them. Now, if it was a sin for Lehigh and Nephi to offer burnt offerings unto the name of the Lord, as typical of the sacrifice of the Son of God, then the before mentioned individuals, who were not of the tribe of Levi, are equally guilty with them, and, according to Himes, will be visited with the wrath of God. If one then condems the Book of Mormon on the ground above stated, then he condems the prophets mentioned above, on the same ground.
Thus the arguments these men make use of, to overthrow Mormonism, will overthrow many of the ancient prophets of God, for whom Mr. Himes and his tribe profess so much reverence in the pulpit; and consequently will overthrow themselves. I will now show what dependence can be placed on Mr. Himes’ book, in regard to another subject, viz: the origin of the Book of Mormon. After republishing a number of pages, from Campbell, who endeavors to prove that Smith actually originated the Book of Mormon, and is so sure of the fact that he says “he could swear to it, as well as he could swear to a man’s face or voice, page 34,” then Mr. Himes to cap the climax, has a note at the bottom of page 26, in which he makes Campbell (his own greatest witness against Mormonism) a liar, by declaring that Rev. Solomon Spaulding is the actual author of the Book of Mormon, and devotes two pages 54 and 55 to prove it.
I will now quote some passages showing how hard they labor to prove that Smith wrote the book. “If I could swear to any man’s voice, face, or person, assuming different names, I would swear that this book was written by one man, and as Joseph Smith is a very ignorant man &c, I cannot doubt for a moment that he is the sole author.” again—“these Smithisms are on every page.” Himes would call them Spauldingisms. On the 33 page it is said,—“It is without exaggera- [11] tion the meanest book in the English language,” “it has not one good sentence in it. “It is certainly Smith’s fabrication, as Satan is the father of lies, or darkness the offspring of night,” p. 38—39. “Gulliver’s Travels is a heroic poem in comparison of this book of Smith,” p. 40.
Thus after straining their nerves to such a degree to prove that Smith wrote the Book, and calling it the meanest book in the English language—not one good sentence in it—Smith wrote it, because he is so ignorant—Gulliver’s travels a heroic poem to it, Himes then goes on in the 54th page, to say the book was written by one Rev. Solomon Spaulding, a minister of the Gospel, “and a graduate from Portsmouth College. If both these stories are true, what graduates Portsmouth College must turn out to the country. Mr. Himes must have graduated from some such place.
I shall now leave this subject by citing to my readers, page 53—54, in Mr. Himes’ Book which gives the true origin of the Book of Mormon, testified to by eleven living witnesses, who take God to bear them witness as to the truth of the same. And of the several supposed authorships my readers will judge for themselves which is the most consistent. One thing is so glaring I must mention it again. Mr. Himes after publishing 38 pages (nearly half of his book,) written by Campbell, that inveterate enemy of the Saints (in consequence of losing so many of his best, and most eloquent and pious men) before he finishes, proves this same Campbell a liar, as I have showed. So it will be seen, it is not necessary for me to endeavor to impeach the veracity of this witness. Himes has saved me the trouble, for which he receives my thanks. As he has not impeached the character of his only remaining witness, viz, “La Roy Sunderland,” the well known author of “Mormonism Exposed” from which the remainder of Mr. Himes’ book is made up, I will try to do it for him, by copying from the “New York Sun” Published July, 17
1840 as follows: . . . [12]