In a recent post, I pleaded with my Latter-day Saint friends to defend the Bible—not just parts of it, but the whole of it as God’s Word. Sadly, some current trends in LDS scholarship threaten to do the opposite.
Recently I have seen an explosion of popularity among Latter-day Saint apologists of the theory that King Josiah’s reforms actually led the suppression of true Israelite religion. These ideas were on the fringe when I joined the Church in 2009, but seem to have really taken off in popularity as they are actively promoted on popular platforms such as Ward Radio, Thoughtful Saints, and Stick of Judah.
This theory holds that the Deuteronomist reformers “corrupted” ancient Israelite religion, stripping out beliefs in a divine mother, a divine father and son, and a more embodied notion of God. A related claim is that Lehi and Nephi stood against this purge and that this is one reason why they were persecuted in Jersualem.
But this theory doesn’t hold up on many levels. It contradicts the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the historical record.
But I want to first highlight one argument that I have not heard anyone else make. Specifically, according to the Bible, Lehi would have been exactly the kind of monotheistic reformer those scholars now dismiss.
- Lehi the Iconoclast: What the Bible Tells Us About His Theological Roots
If Lehi came from northern Israelites who rallied to Hezekiah’s reforms, as many LDS scholars suggest, then his spiritual DNA would be that of a Deuteronomistic reformer, not a closet syncretist.
One of the unusual aspects of the Book of Mormon narrative is that Lehi a descendant of Joseph through the tribe of Manasseh is living in Jerusalem in 597 BC. If this is a true history, the best explanation for this is that Lehi descended from northern Israelites who migrated to Judah during Hezekiah’s reforms.
2 Chronicles 30–31 describes a great passover celebration that Hezekiah holds. He invites people from all over the two kingdoms to come and worship God. And despite the people’s imperfect efforts at worship, God accepts it and promises renewal and blessings. It is a truly miraculous revival.
If Lehi (or his ancestors) were a part of the Israelites who came to Jerusalem during the reign of Hezekiah, then that tells us something important about his theological commitments. The people who came to Jerusalem during Hezekiah’s great Passover were enthusiastic reformers. They not only celebrated the feast with joy—they went out and destroyed high places, Asherah poles (that were dedicated to the worship of a female goddess), and other remnants of pagan worship (2 Chron. 31:1). This is exactly what Josiah would later bring about as part of his reforms. In other words, if Lehi’s family came from this group, they would have been iconoclastic monotheists, devoted to the exclusive worship of Yahweh and aligned with the spirit of Deuteronomy that Josiah would champion.
The idea that Lehi would have secretly supported worship of a mother in heaven, or other syncretic religious practices is without any historical support and indeed it directly contradicts the Book of Mormon’s own portrayal of Lehi as a faithful prophet warning of judgment for apostasy and idolotry.
2. Speculation vs. Scripture: There’s No Evidence for a Deuteronomist Conspiracy
The idea of a “Deuteronomist” school or faction within ancient Israel is entirely speculative. It’s not something the Bible itself ever names or describes. Likewise, no artifacts, no inscriptions, no ancient texts speak of “Deuteronomists.”
Some scholars use “Deuteronomist” simply to refer to the theology of Deuteronomy. This is a responsible usage. But others suggest that this was a shadowey group manipulating history and altering the Hebrew scriptures.
Rather than embracing speculative reconstructions, we have something much firmer: the Bible itself. The Book of Deuteronomy and the histories found in Joshua, Judges, and Kings have been seen as inspired scripture for centuries. And as discussed below, Jesus quoted from Deuteronomy to refute Satan (Matthew 4), and prophets like Jeremiah built their entire message on Deuteronomic themes. Rather than building our theology on speculative reconstructions, we should begin with what God has actually revealed—the biblical text itself.
3. Deuteronomy’s Theology Saturates the Old Testament
The idea that “Deuteronomists” hijacked Israelite religion and corrupted the scriptures runs directly counter to the Bible itself. Far from being an isolated or fringe strand, Deuteronomistic theology permeates the Old Testament. Themes of covenant obedience, centralized worship, blessings for faithfulness, and exile for rebellion are not limited to Deuteronomy—they shape the narratives of Joshua through Kings, echo in the prophets, and form the theological backbone of Israel’s understanding of its covenant-relationship with God.
4. Jeremiah: A Prophet in the Deuteronomist Tradition
One of the prophets that draws most extensively from Deuteronomy is Jeremiah. This is significant since the Book of Mormon suggests that Lehi and Jeremiah ran in similar circles and were part of the same prophetic tradition. They would have likely been preaching the covenant theology of the Deuteronomists–not opposing it.
Jeremiah repeatedly echoed deuteronomistic themes such as covenant obedience and cursing:
Deuteronomy 28:15 – “But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God… all these curses shall come upon thee.”
Jeremiah 11:3–4 – “Cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this covenant… Obey my voice, and do them, according to all which I command you…”
Another major common theme is the need for centralized worship and the evil of idols and occultic practices:
Deuteronomy 12:2–5 – “Ye shall utterly destroy all the places… where the nations served their gods… But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose… thither shall ye come.”
Jeremiah 7:9–10, 30 – “Will ye steal, murder… and walk after other gods… and come and stand before me in this house…? For the children of Judah have done evil… they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name…”
And most notably of all, Jeremiah’s promise of a new covenant written on mankind’s inner parts is based on a similar promise in Deuteronomy:
Deuteronomy 30:6 – “The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart… to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart…”
Jeremiah 31:33 – “I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts…”
Far from rejecting or subverting Deuteronomy, Jeremiah affirms it at every turn. He stands in their tradition, and his prophetic ministry is animated by the theology they championed.
This continuity matters. Jeremiah wasn’t corrupted by some Deuteronomistic redactor—he preached covenant faithfulness, exclusive worship of Yahweh, and warned of exile, precisely because that was the heart of God’s message to Israel all along.
5. Jesus Quotes Deuteronomy as the Word of God
Jesus doesn’t repudiate the Deuteronomistic tradition—He affirms and fulfills it. When tempted in the wilderness, Jesus answers Satan exclusively with quotations from Deuteronomy (see Matthew 4:1–11). And He teaches the Shema (“Hear, O Israel…”), the centerpiece of the monotheism of Deuteronomy, as the greatest commandment (Deut. 6:4–5; see Mark 12:29–30). And He frequently warns, like the prophets before Him, that judgment comes for covenant unfaithfulness (e.g., Matthew 23). Jesus doesn’t treat Deuteronomy as a corrupted text or an apostate tradition—He treats it as the very Word of God. To follow Christ is to embrace the theology of Moses and the so-called Deuteronomists
6. The Book of Mormon Repeats and Reinforces Deuteronomistic Theology
Ironically, the Book of Mormon—often used by LDS apologists to challenge Deuteronomistic influence—mirrors that very theology throughout. It emphasizes covenant blessings and cursings, the need for strict obedience to divine law, and the centrality of written scripture (see 2 Nephi 1–5; Alma 9; Helaman 12). One of the book’s primary themes is the call of the Deuteronomists that “inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall prosper in the land” (2 Nephi 1:20) (See Deuteronomy 5:33, 28:1)
7. The Book of Mormon Affirms the Bible Came in Purity from the Jews, Leaving no Room for a Deuteronomist Conspiracy
If the Book of Mormon wanted to suggest that the Bible was heavily altered or corrupted by “Deuteronomists” shortly before Lehi’s day, it forgot to say so. In fact, it says the opposite.
In 1 Nephi 13:24–25, an angel tells Nephi that the Hebrew scriptures would came forth from the Jews and be transmitted to the gentiles in purity:
“These last records… contain the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; and they also contain many of the prophecies of the holy prophets… and they go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles…”
Later in the same vision, Nephi is told that “many plain and precious things” would be lost (v. 28)—but crucially, these losses are said to occur after the record reaches the Gentiles, not during its Jewish transmission.
This directly contradicts the idea that Josiah or some Deuteronomistic school corrupted the Hebrew Bible before Christ. If the Bible had already been stripped of many key doctrines, then the Book of Mormon could not describe it as going from the Jews to the Gentiles “in purity.” The two claims are mutually exclusive.
8. The Slippery Slope: What Can We Trust If the Bible Was Rewritten?
Once you accept the idea that the Deuteronomists (or redactors, editors, or scribal manipulators) rewrote history to suit their agenda, it becomes impossible to draw a clear line. Why mistrust Deuteronomy but trust Leviticus? Why accept Isaiah but reject Kings? Why believe in Josiah’s reforms or Jeremiah’s call to repentance if they were allegedly reshaped by ideologues?
If those proposing a Deuteronomistic conspriacy are right, then the Bible as we know it is not reliable or trustworthy. It is the work of men who actively subverted the truth and rewrote the narrative to make themselves the heroes of the story.
If Deuteronomistic theology is suspect, then huge portions of the Old Testament — including its moral vision, covenant warnings, and call to exclusive worship of Yahweh — collapse with it.
And if Jesus Himself endorsed and quoted these texts, then calling them corrupted means we are accusing Jesus of either not knowing or not caring that He was quoting from a revisionist forgery written by people hostile to true faith of God. Simply put if Jesus Himself endorsed and quoted these texts, then calling them corrupted means accusing the Son of God of ignorance or complicity. –and that’s not only wrong, it’s blasphemous.
Conclusion: A Call to Trust the Bible—and the God Who Gave It
If you’re LDS and have found these new theories appealing, I totally understand. But tearing down the Word of God is not the answer.
The Bible does not need rescuing. It needs believing. We don’t honor the Scriptures—or the Savior who inspired and defended them—by rewriting history. Instead, we honor them best by receiving them as God’s Word.