After reading the book Joseph Smith's Response to Skepticism, what is clear to me is that Joseph Smith had two goals or agendas. The first was to combat the rising skepticism and atheism of his day. Part of what caused this rise in atheism and skepticism was the versions of Feminism that sought to masculinize women and feminize men. This led to some Protestant sects becoming feminized which was already starting in the days of Joseph Smith. This was an issue for many Christians of the 1800s because Christianity had clearly become a more masculine religion after the Indo-Europeans had transformed Christianity (see the books The Germanization of Medieval Christianity and Militant Christianity by Alice Kehoe). One response to this feminization process, from Christians of the 1800s was a drive to revive virile masculinity and fathers and mothers in the home. Joseph Smith’s Book of Mormon was one such response to the trend of feminizing Christian men. For more details see chapter 15, “Arise from the Dust, My Sons, and Be Men”: Masculinity in the Book of Mormon by Amy Easton-Flake in the book Americanist Approaches to the Book of Mormon.
Part of the reason for this rise in versions of Feminism that masculinizes women and feminizes men, is in part the result of Protestantism itself, as argued by many Eastern Orthodox Christians today in 2025. In contrast to Protestantism, with it's endless interpretations of the Bible resulting in eventually Feminist interpretations, the Orthodox Church maintained it's pro-family structure and masculine identity through for example the Greek Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church; through a clear hierarchy of authority and respect for cultural tradition. As well as a strong ethnic identity, as "New Testament Christianity" was integrated into these ethnic cultural families whether it be Russian or Greek, etc.; wherein the tribal cultural traditions were integrated with Christian symbols and stories, forming a tight knit community. In contrast, as Protestant Christianity in North America became “sectarianized,” it became less and less about lineage and cultural tribal identity and more about "belief systems" and right interpretations of the Bible, resulting in schisms and interpretation wars; and thus a loss of any ethnic cultural identity and tribal belonging as it became more about self-centered beliefism: just saying the "sinners prayer" at an altar call to save one's self, and often that's it. It was about one's self and so Protestant sects began competing like businesses, selling their creeds and sectarian theologies like competing fast food chain menu offers. So that you now have sectarian books on “systematic theology” with an utter lack of a feeling of familial tribal belonging. Churches are now so business-oriented as “belief system packages” being sold nowadays, that Church services often begin by encouraging members to turn around and shake hands with each other because of the utter lack of intimacy, trust, and bonding that takes place in many Protestant churches nowadays.
... some women really be like "Jesus is my boyfriend," until I marry, until I meet my guy, Jesus is my husband. Some women like that weird theology. Some of you [Evangelical Christian] guys hold [the view] where you think that book [The Song of Solomon] is about Jesus and the church. ... I'll be honest with you a lot of our [Evangelical Protestant] worship songs, let's keep it a [real], they're like love songs to Jesus, right? Think about hymns ... my son [... said, if you] remove the American context, we sing soft rock love songs to Jesus, that is what [Contemporary Christian Music (CCM)] is. If you aren't coming from a paradigm like that and that's predominantly what CCM music is, I think that's very feminized, right? If you can literally take the song and swap out the word Jesus and put the word "baby" or "her," "she," how is that not feminine, right? It's soft music, it's very soft music. Now I think this has gotten better, [... but] generally speaking, a lot of the stuff we sing is very soft; and I think it's difficult for men to sing soft rock love songs to Jesus. We're supposed to love Jesus, we're supposed to have reverence for Jesus. But the songs start feeling like Jesus is your boyfriend, like that's weird and that is because the church has been feminized in my opinion. .... [The theology and doctrine is an issue as well ...] here's an example take a book like Song of Solomon which is a romance novel, it's a romance book; it's about a man and a woman, that's what that book is about, right; it's about a man and a woman, it's about their love, it's about passion, young Jewish boys weren't allowed to read it until they became a certain age; and there's a weird [Protestant] theology that some of you guys hold, I'm gonna offend some of you guys, [that is] a weird theology some of you guys hold: where you think that book is about Jesus and the Church, and if you take that to its conclusion there's some really weird stuff happening, some sexual stuff happening with Jesus and the Church and where the bride and Jesus is [the male Christian as the bride of Jesus]. Stop [thinking that]. Those are metaphors, that's a metaphor .... that's not literal, but some of you guys are like I'm gonna get to heaven and have a romantic relationship with Jesus, like it's just weird. Some of this stuff is mad feminine, like let's call it what it is. If you read Song of Solomon [that way about it, it is no] wonder why some men have trouble going to churches. Because you're telling them that you they're going to be a part of something [where they as a man are] going to be Jesus's wife in heaven. Think through this. ...... the new Israel the church, Gentiles [are] being grafted in, it's beautiful; but it's not a romantic relationship, but that's a lot of the tone and the music around it; and it's okay for women because some women really be like "Jesus is my boyfriend" until I marry, until I meet my guy, Jesus is my husband. Some women are like that, it's much more sensible for women to view Jesus this way. .... So this is real and I didn't make this stuff up, [a lot of] men have been saying this stuff for years. Men have been saying this stuff in church for years and this is why a lot of men have trouble going to church. ...
A lot of ministry ... a lot of these churches, the the entire staff [are] women and [there is only a male] pastor or two [... and] some elders, but then all the staff and everything is ran by [women] ....... I think that sometimes men, masculine men, [don't like this stuff], men that like to work out, men [that] like to box, men that like to go hunting, men that like to fill in the blank [that are] quote-unquote stereotypically masculine; I'm not saying if you don't do those things you're not masculine. I'm just saying that those things tend to be reserved for a certain type of man.
Another thing Mormonism does is restore the concept of tribal culture and tribal identity through ethnicity. The Protestant focus on beliefs over tribe does not exist in Judaism, for everyone is a Jew by tribal ethnicity; as Judaism is an ethnic religion at it's core. Similar to Shintoism as the ethnic/indigenous religion of the Japanese and Buddhism and Confucianism are Chinese folk religions.
The genius of Joseph Smith is that he provided a response to all of these issues by responding to atheism with a theistic American religion. He responding to sectarian splintering with a return to or a revitalization of the tribal religion of Israel by unifying America and the Indo-Europeans with Israel through a mixing of DNA; and by answering the question “Who are the native inhabitants of the Americans?” Also, by declaring them Israelites, and then simultaneously declaring that Europeans in the Americas were also from the Lost Tribes of Israel. Thus Joseph Smith returned to Christianity its original Judaic tribal origins.
From my perspective, what Smith did was continue the already germanization of Christianity process, by providing Europeans a more tribal identity through biblical ideas. Christianity had already been greatly culturally transformed by German converts to Christianity over the centuries. Mormonism was just a continuation of that, but instead of Gentiles becoming Jewish, Joseph Smith declared that some Europeans were already Israelites. You see in the New Testament, Paul literally believed that Indo-Europeans needed to have their genetics swapped out for Jewish genes. In brief, the word "spirit" is in Greek pneuma (pronounced ("nooma"). This was for Paul an actual fluid substance that could be literally poured into people and could fill them up and interact with their human matter and DNA (see my essay here). When Jesus died and resurrected, he became a pneumatic ("noomatic") being, composed of omnipresent divine pneuma/nooma. This pneuma (fluid substance) carried with it divine properties as well Jesus' Jewish DNA. So when the Gentile received the spirit (pneuma) of Christ, this fluid pneuma was literally poured into the person and began a process of swapping out their Gentile DNA for Jesus's Jewish DNA. This idea sounded outlandish when I first learned about the concept, but the biblical scholarship is clear on this and can't be denied. So before I continue here are some sources that make this "gene swapping" evidentially clear:
- A Jewish Paul, Matthew Thiessen’s Case for Paul’s Pneumatic Gene Therapy by Clarke Morledge (Also see the book A Jewish Paul by Matthew Thiessen (2023 Edition), chapter 8 "Pneumatic Gene Therapy."
If Sons, Then Heirs: A Study of Kinship and Ethnicity in the Letters of Paul by Caroline Johnson Hodge (pages 12-15, 140-146).
The Incorruptible Seed and Part 2 here
This "gene swapping" covered in the biblical scholarship above, is why when Paul says that in Christ there is “no barbarians or Scythians [i.e. Indo-Europeans],” (Colossians 3: 10-11), he is saying that through the fluid pneuma containing the seed/ethnicity of Jesus, European converts to Christianity for example, are literally genetically transformed into Jewish ethnic persons (thus transformed into Israelites) through the pneuma (spirit) in them, by transforming their DNA.
Paul was of the Tribe of Benjamin and apparently did not know about, or did not believe in, or did not understand the concept of the Lost Tribes of Israel. Joseph Smith can then be seen as a modern-day seer and revelator, adding an alternative perspective to the first century revelator the Apostle Paul, regarding how Gentiles/Europeans can be integrated and merged into Israel without always a full gene swapping. So Joseph Smith's solution was not this concept of a full gene swapping but instead the idea was that Europeans in particular were often members of the Lost Tribes of Israel, from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in particular.
As the article Scandinavian Mormons and Their "Zion" by Helge Seljaas (2016), explains:
[The founding of the LDS Church] by Joseph Smith in 1830, The Mormon church has been very much an "American" institution. The Book of Mormon, which is accepted as divine scripture by the membership of the church, deals largely with America, "a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands . . ." (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi, 1.5). In this respect the early leaders of the church, mostly from New England, continued the tradition of the founding Pilgrim fathers of building a commonwealth for Christ, a Zion that was to be a light for the world. In 1831 Smith made public a revelation in which he addressed the righteous with the following words: "Go ye out of Babylon; gather ye from among the nations ..." (Doctrines & Covenants 133.7). Five years later, at the dedication of the temple at Kirtland, Ohio, Smith and his companion Oliver Cowdery declared that Moses had appeared to them and committed to them the keys for the gathering of Israel from the lands of the North (Doctrines & Covenants 110. 11). According to Smith, Judah was to return to Jerusalem, but Israel would return to Zion. The two places had become separated, and it was the job of Mormon missionaries to seek out the blood of Israel spread throughout the world and lead its members to Zion. Zion was America, but by the time the Scandinavians were hearing about it from the missionaries, it had been localized in the minds of most people as the Rocky Mountain area. The gathering of Israel became the most influential of Mormonism's doctrines. Over the next century slightly more than 30,000 Scandinavians would be gathered in the "gospel net" and settled in Zion. Denmark was the leading nation, producing 56 percent of all Scandinavian Mormons; a little over 32 percent were Swedish, 11 percent were Norwegian …
In the article The blood of Israel in Europe by Wilfried Decoo (September 25, 2012) we read:
At a multi-stake conference in Berlin in 2010, Area President Erich W. Kopischke quoted Joseph Smith as having declared that “England, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, Holland and Belgium have a considerable amount of the blood of Israel among the people which must be gathered out.” It was surprising to be reminded of that doctrinal concept.1
Older members who grew up with the “doctrinal answers” of Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie are no doubt well acquainted with the notion: scores of Europeans, especially in northern countries, are literal descendants of the House of Israel through the lost tribes, in particular the tribe of Ephraim. That would explain why so many British and Scandinavian citizens in the 19th century were willing to accept the gospel, for their “believing blood” recognized the truth. As these thousands of European converts heeded the call to emigrate to Zion, first to Nauvoo and then to Deseret, it became common to say these “Israelites” saved the fledgling church in America, injecting it with their sheer numbers, their goods, tools, skills, and knowledge. In 1890, two-thirds of Utah’s population consisted of such immigrants and their children.2 Genetic studies confirm the ancestry of white Utah Mormon residents: 61% British, 31% Scandinavian, with Swiss and German for most of the remainder.3
In the 1960s and 70s, lost tribes, Israel’s blood in Europe, as well as somewhat implausible explications in popular Mormon books, slowly faded out of official view. Church manuals and magazines turned to what correlation emphasized as the more central tenets of the faith, fit for an expanding, worldwide church. …
… From the early days of Mormonism two doctrinal approaches appear side by side, one expressing a high regard for Israel’s elect lineage, the other emphasizing the gospel’s universalism which directly includes all mankind. The relation between lineage and universalism is an issue that also the early Christian church had to confront, as various events and discussions in Acts and Epistles demonstrate. Both approaches can be found in the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, hence the possibility of selecting verses that give more support to one position or the other. Joseph Smith frequently stressed universalism, but within it he could simultaneously see the literal gathering of Israel and the restoration of the Ten Tribes. In the original perspective, white Europeans and Americans were considered Gentiles who could through conversion be adopted in the House of Israel. But the recognition of literal Israelite descent, which was first applied to Joseph Smith and his family, became gradually applied to all Latter-day Saints. Such literal descendency could be explained by the mixing of “remnants” of scattered Israelites with Gentiles somewhere in their ancestry.
… the notion that “the people of Israel were a distinct and noble people in the premortal existence” and that “foreordination determined, to a large extent, an individual’s placement among tribes and nations” seems to remain official doctrine, as e.g. taught though current CES Institute material, with ample quotations from Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie, but leaving out the parts about the “less valiant.” The quotations further confirm that “Israel is an eternal people. Members of that chosen race first gained their inheritance with the faithful in the pre-mortal life.” And: “The great majority of those who have come into the Church are Ephraimites. It is the exception to find one of any other tribe, unless it is of Manasseh.”7
On the other hand, specifically since 1978, members of the First Presidency and of the Twelve have repeatedly emphasized universalism, which is attested in both ancient and modern scriptures and which had never been ignored in previous decades either. …
Gordon B. Hinckley gave a stern warning: “We all rejoiced in the 1978 revelation given to President Kimball … I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ … Let us all recognize that each of us is a son or daughter of our Father in Heaven, who loves all of His children.”11 …
At the same time, in conformity with Joseph Smith’s dynamic incorporation of both lineage and universalism, church authorities continue to use the imagery of the Abrahamic covenant and of the House of Israel, with emphasis on its all-encompassing nature. In Mormon doctrine, indeed, universalism does not exclude the continued recognition of Israel as a separate people, hence in the Book of Mormon the predicted fruitful interaction between the Gentiles and the scattered House of Israel for the salvation of both, as illustrated in Zenos’ allegory of the olive trees (Jacob 5) ….
… Just like in the days of Peter and Paul, it is not always evident to balance the advocacy of chosen lineage and the acceptance of a totally deracialized humanity. Peter identified the Church contrastively as “a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people” (1 Peter 2:9), while Paul focused on universalism: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:28–29). Hence the need for clarifications, such as Daniel H. Ludlow was invited to give in the Ensign.15 Hence also the tensions when some authors, who uphold the doctrines of a preexistent House of Israel and of the subsequent chosen bloodlines based on premortal merit, feel that these insights are now being “untaught” and “ignored.”16
As to the notion of Israelite blood in Europe, where does it stand now after its extensive use in former decades? Its occurrence seems rather rare, but it tends to turn up at weighty conferences and meetings in Europe, raised by eminent church leaders, in order to boost the faith in church growth. …
Next to Britain, the presence of Israelite blood had also been recognized early on in Scandinavian and Germanic countries. As the church slowly expanded in European Latin countries (Italy, Spain, and Portugal), they too became included in Israelite descendency. In 1995, at a seminar for European stake and mission presidents held in Paris, Jeffrey R. Holland strongly reemphasized the notion:
The Church in Europe must live again. The work of the Church has run on the backs of its European saints since the beginning. Don’t think that you are just minding the shop waiting for the Savior to come. Don’t think that the great days of gathering in Europe are over. This is our time. Europe is the richest composition of the blood of Israel we’ve known. The blood of Israel out of these lands saved the Church. They left behind family members, children, grandchildren, and friends. They are still here. And we must find them. The blood of Israel is here.20
In 2010 in Berlin, as mentioned at the onset of this article, Elder Kopischke referred to Joseph Smith as having declared that “England, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, Holland and Belgium have a considerable amount of the blood of Israel among the people which must be gathered out.” One should remark that this quotation comes from the White Horse prophecy, which has been identified by Church leaders and by experts as a late nineteenth-century document, of which the content cannot be verified as authored by Joseph Smith.21 But it is telling that more than one document in the second half of the 19th century tried to foist later Mormon beliefs upon Joseph Smith. The mention of “a considerable amount of the blood of Israel” or “the richest composition of the blood of Israel” in these countries vastly amplifies the early Mormon idea of only “remnants” of scattered Israelites who had mixed with Gentiles. …
Positive views on “believing blood” and “lineage”:
The preceding discussion may give the impression that concepts such as “believing blood” and “lineage” are better seen as obsolete because of their position within the doctrinal perspective that later also harbored racist beliefs. That should not be the case as long as the concepts are clearly circumscribed and remain within their proper scriptural realm. Also, sometimes some critics throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Bruce R. McConkie defined “believing blood” as “the aptitude and inclination of certain persons to accept and believe the principles of revealed religion.”22 That sounds quite satisfactory if applicable to any individual from whatever background or race. Scriptures such as “my sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me” (John 10:26) or “mine elect hear my voice“ (D&C 29:7) support the notion that a number of people readily react to the message and others not. The factors that contribute to conversion are also an interesting object of sociological and psychological research which helps us understand the complex framework that facilitates or hinders that drastic mental step.23 …
The concept of “lineage” as tied to the House of Israel is deeply ingrained in Mormon doctrine and in the Scriptures. As mentioned supra, it is very possible to combine it with a universalist perspective, without referring to premortal classes. The pivotal principles of scattering and gathering can be interpreted on various levels and in various locations, including their extension to multiple Zions. “Lineage” can continue to have special significance in the patriarchal blessing which, since the dawn of Mormonism, has become a treasured once-in-a-lifetime experience for Latter-day Saints. In earlier times, when nearly all members were of North European descent (including the American-born white converts), it seemed uncomplicated to assume literal tribal descendency from Ephraim, in line with the beliefs of scattering of the lost tribes. For American Indians, as supposed descendants of Lamanites, the physical lineage was evidently traced to Manasseh. But in view of expanding the church to all countries and races, as well as of advancing insights in demography, adjustments in rationale and formulation help smooth the attribution to a certain tribe, such as through adoption, assignment to a tribe, bestowal of the blessings of a tribe upon an individual, or by simply accepting that over some three millennia, the blood of Israel, literally or figuratively, spread to all corners of the world, even to Pygmies and to Aboriginals. Whether literal or spiritual, the determination of tribal descent is meant as an emotional confirmation of belonging to the House of Israel.24 ...
As we can see, despite its problems which is discussed in the rest of the article quoted above, the very concept itself, when any racist ideas is removed, is part of LDS scripture and doctrine. What this means is that instead of this idea of Gene Swapping or "pneumatic gene therapy," Joseph Smith argued that those who converted to the LDS Church were revealed as already descendants of the Lost Tribes tribes of Israelites (whether spiritually or literally). For example, an Indo-European convert to Mormonism from the North countries, was believed to have intermixed with one of the Lost Tribes of Israel. So as Smith says below, somebody who has more of the Israelite bloodline have less of a need for a conversion of the Spirit to transform their genes into Israelite genes:
“[A]s the Holy Ghost falls upon one of the literal seed of Abraham, it is calm and serene… while the effect of the Holy Ghost upon a Gentile, is to purge out the old blood, and make him actually of the seed of Abraham. That man that has none of the blood of Abraham (naturally) must have a new creation by the Holy Ghost. In such a case, there may be more of a powerful effect upon the body, and visible to the eye, than upon an Israelite.”
~ Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church, v. 3, p. 380
[Brigham Young confirmed this:]
“[Joseph taught] that the Gentile blood was actually cleansed out of their veins, and the blood of Jacob made to circulate in them; and the revolution and change in the system were so great that it caused the beholder to think they were going into fits.”
~ Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 2, p. 269
(Source)
What this means is that having more Israelite blood, Joseph Smith (who LDS scripture says is of the Tribe of Joseph) as an American of Irish and British decent does not need to undergo a "[purging] out the old blood" to "make him actually of the seed of Abraham." Instead, Smith was able (through creative midrash-making), to maintain his dignity and retain a sense of respect for his ethnic heritage by merging Europeans like himself into the Lost Tribes of Israel. I personally see this as Joseph Smith restoring a sense of pride in his ethnic heritage (which was mostly British and Irish) and combining that with his pride in being an American: by forming new scripture that makes Europeans an elect chosen people and America itself just as much a holy land as Jerusalem.
“Once we know who we are, and the royal linage of which we are a part, our actions and directions in life will be more appropriate to the inheritance.” [Russel M. Nelson]
“ . . . the Gentiles who receive the gospel are, in the greater part, gentiles who have the blood of Israel in their veins.” [Joseph Fielding Smith]
“Is it necessary that we be of the house of Israel in order to accept the gospel and all the blessings pertaining to it? If so, how do we become of the house of Israel, by adoption or by direct lineage? Every person who embraces the gospel becomes of the house of Israel. In other words, they become members of the chosen lineage, or Abraham’s children through Isaac and Jacob unto whom the promises were made. The great majority of those who become members of the Church are literal descendants of Abraham through Ephraim, son of Joseph, Those who are not literal descendants of Abraham and Israel must become such, and when they are baptized and confirmed they are grafted into the tree and are entitled to all the rights and privileges as heirs.” [Joseph Fielding Smith]
“... In the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord has informed us in detail how this Priesthood descended. After explaining that it is the duty of the twelve apostles to ordain “evangelical ministers,” or patriarchs, in this dispensation, he declares that “the order of this Priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made.” … [Joseph Fielding Smith]
LINEAGE IN ISRAEL BY BLOOD RELATIONSHIP. Is the lineage of Ephraim traced through blood relationship, or is it traced by the believing class?
When a man who is of Israel joins the Church, his tribal relationship does not change. For instance, a descendant of Judah would be classed as of the tribe of Judah, a descendant of Benjamin as of the tribe of Benjamin, and so with those of other tribes. Ephraim was blessed with the birthright in Israel, and in this dispensation he has been called to stand at the head to bless the other tribes of Israel. This is the interpretation as discovered in the discourses of the leading brethren and in the blessings of the patriarchs of the Church from the beginning, as the following excerpts will show:
“There is the fact revealed through the Prophet Joseph Smith, who was of the lineage of Joseph through the loins of Ephraim, that the majority of the people who have been first to receive the gospel and priesthood of the latter-day dispensation, are descendants of some of the house of Ephraim scattered among the nations, and therefore, the stick of Joseph-the Book of Mormon-is in their hands.”
“It is Ephraim that I have been searching for all the days of my preaching, and that is the blood which ran in my veins when I embraced the gospel. If there are any of the other tribes of Israel mixed with the Gentiles, we are also searching for them, Though the Gentiles are cut off, do not suppose that we are not going to preach the gospel among the Gentile nations, for they are mingled with the house of Israel…. You understand who we are; we are of the house of Israel, of the royal seed, of the royal blood.”President Brigham Young also said: “You have heard Joseph say the people did not know him; he had his eyes on the relation to blood-relations…. His descent from Joseph that was sold into Egypt was direct, and the blood was pure in him. This is why the Lord chose him, and we are pure when this blood-strain from Ephraim comes down pure. The decrees of the Almighty will be exalted-that blood which was in him was pure, and he had the sole right and lawful power, as he was the legal heir to the blood that has been on the earth and has come down through a pure lineage.”[Joseph Fielding Smith]
“If the patriarch who is here should lay his hands upon your head and declare your genealogy, he would tell you . . . that, almost without exception, you are the descendants of Ephraim.” … It is clearly shown from these blessings and the interpretations given to the scriptures that the brethren from the beginning of the Church in these last days believed and taught that lineage is a matter of blood relationship. However, if a person should join the Church, and he is a pure Gentile, the Prophet has said the old blood would be purged out and he would be grafted into the house of Israel. In such a case the individual could be properly assigned to one of the tribes, probably to Ephraim.” [Joseph Fielding Smith]
“Will we go to the Gentile nations to preach the Gospel? Yes, and gather out the Israelites wherever they are mixed among the nations of the earth. What part or portion of them? The same part or portion that redeemed the House of Jacob, and saved them from perishing with famine in Egypt. …Ephraim has become mixed with all the nations of the earth, and it is Ephraim that is gathering together.
It is Ephraim that I have been searching for all the days of my preaching, and that is the blood which ran in my veins when I embraced the Gospel. If there are any of the other tribes of Israel mixed with the Gentiles, we are searching for them. Though the Gentiles are cut off, do not suppose that we are not going to preach the Gospel among the Gentile nations, for they are mingled with the House of Israel, …
… Take a family of ten children, for instance, and you may find nine of them purely of the Gentile stock, and one son, or one daughter in that family who is purely of the blood of Ephraim. It was in the veins of the father or the mother, and was produced in the son or daughter, while all the rest of the family are Gentiles. You may think that it is singular, but it is true. It is the House of Israel we are after, and we care not whether they come from the east, the west, the north, or the south; from China, Russia, England, California, North or South America, or some other locality; and it is the very lad on whom father Jacob laid his hands, that will save the House of Israel. The Book of Mormon came to Ephraim, for Joseph Smith was a pure Ephraimite, and the Book of Mormon was revealed to him, and while he lived he made it his business to search for those who believed the Gospel….You understand who we are; we are of the House of Israel, of the royal seed, of the royal blood.” [Brigham Young]
Scriptures:
D&C 86:8-11:
“Therefore, thus saith the Lord unto you [Joseph Smith and the first Mormons in 1832], with whom the priesthood hath continued through the lineage of your fathers—
For ye are lawful heirs, according to the flesh, and have been hid from the world with Christ in God—Therefore your life and the priesthood have remained, and must needs remain through you and your lineage until the restoration of all things spoken by the mouths of all the holy prophets since the world began.Therefore, blessed are ye if ye continue in my goodness, a light unto the Gentiles, and through this priesthood, a savior unto my people Israel. The Lord hath said it. Amen.”
Article of Faith #10:
“We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; ...”
Doctrine and Covenants 109:67:
“And may all the scattered remnants of Israel, who have been driven to the ends of the earth, come to a knowledge of the truth, believe in the Messiah, and be redeemed from oppression, and rejoice before thee.”
Doctrine and Covenants 103:17:
“For ye [LDS members in 1834] are the children of Israel, and of the seed of Abraham, and ye must needs be led out of bondage by power, and with a stretched-out arm.”
Doctrine and Covenants 110:11:
“After this vision closed, the heavens were again opened unto us; and Moses appeared before us, and committed unto us the keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth, and the leading of the ten tribes from the land of the north.”
Doctrine and Covenants 64:34-36:
“Behold, the Lord requireth the heart and a willing mind; and the willing and obedient shall eat the good of the land of Zion in these last days.And the rebellious shall be cut off out of the land of Zion, and shall be sent away, and shall not inherit the land.
For, verily I say that the rebellious are not of the blood of Ephraim, wherefore they shall be plucked out.”
Much is said about the tribes of Israel from which most of us are supposed to have descended. With some there is quite a feeling of choice in regard to the tribe from which they sprang, but let me say that whether we sprang from Judah, Ephraim, Manasseh, or from a family of Gentile origin, that of all these tribes and classes, whoever receive the Gospel and are molded and fashioned by the spirit of the living God, will be entitled to a place in the kingdom of our Heavenly Father. Hence it is written "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him." And again it is written, "And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all." —[Colossians] [1:]16 and [3:]10, 11.
In other words, Hyde is confirming what Joseph had explained and Brigham echoed above, which is that those with less Israelite DNA will receive more of the spirit ("nooma") poured into them, molding and fashioning them into a noomatic body by the spirit (nooma) of the living God. So one should not feel choice or superior in regard to their tribe from which they sprang for the pneuma will mold and fashion everyone (all ethnic tribes and classess) until the pneuma of Christ is in all.
If you really look at the Hebrew Bible and read it through the lens of dominion and dynasty (the title of the book here), you begin to see that Israelite religion is just like many other religions: which is about ethnicity, as in family lineage and procreation of heirs.
When you look at Christianity from this perspective, Mormon Christianity is a return to Israelite lineal tribal religion. Instead of a European Gentile believing he has to have his genes literally transformed into Jewish genes (as Paul argues for in the New new Testament), Mormon theology presents the idea that Gentiles, in particular Europeans of British, German and Scandinavian descent, already have some Israelite genes intermixed with their Indo-European DNA. So that they do not have to undergo what Matthew Thiessen calls “pneumatic gene therapy.”
So if the first LDS members were already members of the Israelite family as Europeans, then it was not about “pneumatic gene therapy” (like with Paul's non-Israelite converts); and was more about entering a covenant (commitment) toward building or growing the tribe of God and gathering Israel. As we read in the LDS Article of Faith number 10:
We [LDS Christians] believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent …
This is what separates Mormonism from other Christian sects, is that it is not so much a belief system, as it is a tribal familial religion: that began primarily as a quasi-ethnic religion of European converts who were considered members of the Lost Tribes of Israel.
Part of what led to the Mormon Church becoming a primarily European religion in the beginning was, as we saw above, because most converts were of Scandinavian and British ancestry; who then practiced polygamy resulting in a new quasi-ethnic religious identity, as the Mormons of Utah. By the way the current trend to not use the term “Mormon” in the LDS Church is in my view a fad, as Joseph Smith himself endorsed the word Mormon. One reason I prefer the word Mormon is because it distinguishes LDS Christianity as a more quasi-ethnic tribal religion; which is what I think it is, especially in its original form.
What Smith was doing from a mythological perspective, is that by saying that he himself is of Israelite lineage (according to the Book of Mormon), and by restoring Abrahamic covenants, he was generating a new People. See the article Peoplehood by Denver S.. In other words, it was not about early European converts engaging in gene swapping or “pneumatic gene therapy,” but the continuation of the Israelite tribes through primarily the European peoples on the added holy land of the American continent. It was through the seed of Europeans that a new Ephraimite People would grow into Zion. As we see in the LDS Book of Abraham 2:11, it was the literal seed (sperm) of the Ephraimite European male body, that the world would be blessed with an Israelite tribe that would initiate the gathering of all the Lost Tribes onto the American continent. Joseph Smith himself, as a European of British and Irish descent, was in the new LDS revelations, considered a descendant of the Lost Tribes of Israel (Joseph of Egypt); and thus polygamy was in part about "bearing the souls of men" (see D&C 132:63): to produce a European Ephraimite and Josephite Peoplehood through Joseph Smith and other European Mormons who practiced polygamy in the 1800s.
As this article by Douglas E. Brinley explains:
… We came to this earth to qualify for eternal life, and marriage is one of the requirements. The highest degree of glory is a family kingdom (see D&C 131:4). …
… At the time of marriage, [LDS members] enter into the same covenant as did Abraham, in which he was promised innumerable seed (see Abraham 2:9–11). Elder Bruce R. McConkie said, “Those portions of [the Abrahamic covenant] which pertain to personal exaltation and eternal increase are renewed with each member of the house of Israel who enters the order of celestial marriage.” [13] Those keys were restored by Elias, who appeared to Joseph Smith in the Kirtland Temple on April 3, 1836. He restored the “dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, saying that in us and our seed all generations after us should be blessed [with the gospel and the priesthood]” (D&C 110:12). In the Resurrection, with death no longer a factor, our seed shall be as innumerable as the “sand upon the seashore” (D&C 132:30). …
… Rearing the Children of God:
When we speak of “our children,” we mean the spirit children of our Heavenly Father. He places a great trust in us when He assigns His children to our custody. We are honored by the stewardship we are given to create bodies for His spirit children. Because women conceive, carry to term, and bear His offspring, their importance to God’s plan is critical. The Lord explains: “For [a wife is] given unto [her husband] to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for [her] exaltation in the eternal worlds, that [she] may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified” (D&C 132:63). …
This is in fact what literally happened, thousands of LDS converts journeyed from primarily Britain, Denmark and Sweden, to make up the main body of the Mormon membership in the 1800s. So for me, Mormonism is not a mere “belief system” but a quasi-ethnic Indo-European tribal religion: in the sense that the main body of Mormons in the original Church believed themselves to be European-Ephraimites. This does not mean that the future growth of the LDS Church will not include more ethnicities, but the main body of the membership was produced by Europeans who practiced polygamy in Utah.
Having myself descended from European Swedish polygamist Mormons on both sides of my family, just like a Jew who is a Jew whether he practices Judaism or not, I am kind of Mormon in a quasi-ethnic sense, whether or not I believe in every current LDS Church policy or not. It is pretty much part of my ethnic heritage as the religious tradition handed down to me by my most recent lineal forefathers and foremothers, who found a tribal identity and meaning in life through Mormonism.
For me this means that whether I choose to be a temple Mormon (i.e. a "covenant path" type Mormon), or a Jack Mormon, or a Non-denominational "Independent Mormon," it's all the same from a quasi-ethnic perspective; as it is less about "belief," and more about your culture, how you were raised LDS: with certain stories and traditions being shared and passed down in your ancestral lineage. In fact, being a Heritage Mormon but not necessarily an Orthodox Mormon, is similar to Orthodox Judaism versus Reform Judaism.
