More than features, JS derives from Lisp because its author was a Scheme implementor. Otherwise function pointers are trivially done even in assembly language, and Smalltalk does have closures.
Or maybe you think of the fact that JS uses prototype-based OOP, which makes it closer to what one would do with Scheme (something inspired from CLOS I guess) than Smalltalk ?
"The Smalltalk notion of an object has been modified and extended in a number of ways. In ThingLab, objects are constructed interactively by editing and making descendants of prototypes. An abstraction hierarchy is used that allows arbitrarily many levels of both parents and descendants, with the problem of objects with several parents being handled by the technique of merging. There is no distinction between classes and instances."
One of these is not like the others. Javascript derives from Lisp (first-class functions, lambdas, closures), not Smalltalk.