At an LDS Church Court:

[TexanKnight]

I think I get the gist of what TexanKnight is trying to get at, but I think he sort of botched the execution.

How surprising that you would have that opinion! lol

Different people having slightly different testimonies of the same event is expected given the faultiness of human memory, and is precisely why small discrepancies found in the Gospels isn’t problematic for me.

ok…again, it is a losing argument to compare books written by different men thousands of years ago in a different language and in a different culture to things said by an American in English in this country less than 200 years ago. And the descrepsensies in js’ versions were not small. They were huge. different ages, different places, different people present and different things said.

Assuming this is a parody of the First Visions(s) I think TexanKnight would’ve done well to have the accused as the sole witness providing multiple, contradictory accounts at various parts of the story.

He did. Everything presented was either by js or quoted by HIS SCRIBE or HIS APOSTLES…or to reporters with whom HE spoke. Your attempts to minimize it fall very flat

 

[TexanKnight]

I get the metaphor, but have pretty much said everything I have to say on the subject of 1st vision accounts in this thread. I started with post #10, and was done by post #74.

True. But I wanted to put it in a real-world context where the silly apologetics look even more ridiculous

But I did have something to say about this:I once ‘crashed’ a meeting held by my Stake for senior priesthood leadership (bishoprics and higher). Seems like an odd thing to want to crash, but they told me an apostle would be conducting, and I wanted to hear what he had to say. The apostle was Robert D. Hales. He had a question and answer period, and one bishop stood up and asked him a hypothetical question. I’m paraphrasing from memory here, but the question was along the lines of this: “Let’s say if I’m conducting a temple recommend interview, and I have a very strong suspicion that the member is not worthy to enter the temple. The member claims to be worthy, but I suspect he is not. Should I issue the temple recommend?”

Elder Hales, without hesitating said (again, I’m paraphrasing from memory): *“In cases where you have no conclusive evidence or firm proof, and the spirit does not dictate one way or the other, you should issue the recommend. Remember, the temple is a place for a member to account for his stewardships with the Lord, and a strong suspicion from a bishop should not stand in the way of that. If he is unworthy, he can take it up with the Lord in the temple, and maybe his conscience will be pricked to resolve the issue. If he is worthy, it’s important we do not deny the blessings of the temple based on heresay or inconclusive evidence.”

irrelevant. I attended a LDS Court. Witnesses were called. Their testimony was all pretty similar, so the guy was exd. But I wanted to show what would happen when a person testifying was confronted by all the different versions of his incident. The LDS would not believe the guy any more than a civil court would. I have won cases when a witness has TWO versions…JS has at least 9. That is one reason why he kept running from the law.
*

I know this story is not directly related to the subject of this thread. But with your talk of how the church court “had no choice but to find that the accused had lied”, I thought I’d relay my personal experience about how the church actually advises it’s local leaders to proceed in matters of worthiness and discipline.

and so did I

 

[TexanKnight]

Your point is well taken. The issue with the multiple accounts of Joseph Smith’s “First Vision” is that the main focus changed numerous times until he settled on heavenly father and Jesus Christ. I wouldn’t have issues if the peripheral details were not consistent. If I had a supernatural vision, I don’t think it is asking me too much to remember who, specifically I saw. I should be able to remember if I saw a Jesus versus many angels versus one angel versus heavenly father and Jesus Christ. I wouldn’t get worked up if he couldn’t remember the exact day of the event or what the weather was like.

Also, if I discussed only one topic with the being, I should remember that one topic. If multiple topics are discussed, I can understand not remembering every single detail at each retelling, but there should be some consistency in the overall narrative.

Yes…one of my problems with the weak apologetics regarding this issue is that they either try to compare to the Scriptures, which I have already addressed, or they try to compare it to how we often tell stories differently each time after an event. I always find that odd, as if a normal event could compare with being visited by THE ALMIGHTY GOD. I suspect that if God and His Son visited any of us, there is not a single detail we would forget about the incident.

 

[manualman]

TexasKnight, are you suggesting that the Christian Scriptures are unreliable since they are thousands of years old? The number of ancient manuscripts we have are nearly unprecedented in history for that era as is the degree of uniformity.

If your point is to critique LDS while protecting the validity of Christian revelation, you’re still digging your hole deeper.

I’m happier with the other poster who claims that the discrepancies in Smith’s vision were substantial changes in the main point, not supporting details. That’s gotta be rather… awkward for Mormons to explain.

 

[TexanKnight]

TexasKnight, are you suggesting that the Christian Scriptures are unreliable since they are thousands of years old? The number of ancient manuscripts we have are nearly unprecedented in history for that era as is the degree of uniformity.

If your point is to critique LDS while protecting the validity of Christian revelation, you’re still digging your hole deeper.

I’m happier with the other poster who claims that the discrepancies in Smith’s vision were substantial changes in the main point, not supporting details. That’s gotta be rather… awkward for Mormons to explain.

nope…what I am saying is to compare the scriptures to things said by js is a poor argument. They are apples and oranges

and no…I am digging no hole

 

[Brandon_Cal]

TexanKnight,

I think you entirely misunderstood my point: The discrepancies that exist between the canonized Gospels and the discrepancies in the various accounts of the First Vision are substantively different precisely because in many cases Joseph Smith himself recounted different (and sometimes mutually exclusive) facts. Four different people can retell four slightly different stories about the same event and yet not be “lying”, whereas if a single individual does so it’s a serious shot to his credibility.

 

[TexanKnight]

TexanKnight,

I think you entirely misunderstood my point: The discrepancies that exist between the canonized Gospels and the discrepancies in the various accounts of the First Vision are substantively different precisely because in many cases Joseph Smith himself recounted different (and sometimes mutually exclusive) facts. Four different people can retell four slightly different stories about the same event and yet not be “lying”, whereas if a single individual does so it’s a serious shot to his credibility.

then, yes…I misunderstood. Thank you for clarifying

 

[BlessedLDS]

TexanKnight,

I think you entirely misunderstood my point: The discrepancies that exist between the canonized Gospels and the discrepancies in the various accounts of the First Vision are substantively different precisely because in many cases Joseph Smith himself recounted different (and sometimes mutually exclusive) facts. Four different people can retell four slightly different stories about the same event and yet not be “lying”, whereas if a single individual does so it’s a serious shot to his credibility.

When I recount my conversion story, I may leave a detail or two out or be more descriptive at other times. It’s not that I’m lying, it’s that what I tell people or how much I tell a pertain depends on who they are and how I’m doing that day.

 

[LivingWaters7]

When I recount my conversion story, I may leave a detail or two out or be more descriptive at other times. It’s not that I’m lying, it’s that what I tell people or how much I tell a pertain depends on who they are and how I’m doing that day.

BlessedLDS, if you’re interested in how critics view the multiple versions of the First Vision, please see this link:

mormonthink.com/firstvisionweb.htm#full

The significant matter is that it isn’t merely leaving a detail or two out, or be more descriptive at other times. It’s an issue of Who appeared to Joseph Smith, and what the visit was about (i.e., matters fundamental to the whole issue, not frivolous details). I think this is especially important when we consider that we’re talking about the appearance of God the Father and Jesus Christ to a person.

 

[iepuras]

When I recount my conversion story, I may leave a detail or two out or be more descriptive at other times. It’s not that I’m lying, it’s that what I tell people or how much I tell a pertain depends on who they are and how I’m doing that day.

You are not lying as I expect that you tell the same basic narrative each time you recount your conversion story. The problem with Joseph Smith’s first vision is that the main narrative changed in substantial ways several times until he ended up with the standard narrative we have today. We are not quibbling over peripheral details that have changed but the fact that the main narrative changed.

 

[debbie_h]

Yes…one of my problems with the weak apologetics regarding this issue is that they either try to compare to the Scriptures, which I have already addressed, or they try to compare it to how we often tell stories differently each time after an event. I always find that odd, as if a normal event could compare with being visited by THE ALMIGHTY GOD. I suspect that if God and His Son visited any of us, there is not a single detail we would forget about the incident.

Yes!!! My thoughts exactly.
A ‘prophet’ of God would not forget anything about such a glorious event. Although I do give credit to JS for having a creative imagination.

 

[TexanKnight]

When I recount my conversion story, I may leave a detail or two out or be more descriptive at other times. It’s not that I’m lying, it’s that what I tell people or how much I tell a pertain depends on who they are and how I’m doing that day.

first, your conversion story is far different than being visited by God and Jesus.

Second, in your conversion story, when you tell it, do you say you were a certain age in one telling and a different age in another telling?

Do you say 1 person saw it, then later 2 people saw it, then later a bunch of people saw it?

I doubt your conversion story is as wildly different as his first vision fantasy

 

[twopekinguys]

Its more of showing Joseph Smith’s 7 version’s of the First Vision in an LDS court context. If Joseph Smith was tried by the LDS church today, they would have ruled him a liar. I believe that is what Texan is trying to portray.

I said 9, you say 7, and LW’s attachment says 10.

I think we all agree there are toooooooo many.

 

[TexanKnight]

I said 9, you say 7, and LW’s attachment says 10.

I think we all agree there are toooooooo many.

Mormonism: It is not the truth until there are 9 versions of it.

 

[TheIrishman]

I said 9, you say 7, and LW’s attachment says 10.

I think we all agree there are toooooooo many.

This made me literally LOL. And you know the old mormon saying, “out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses”. I agree, too many and too different

 

[twopekinguys]

This made me literally LOL. And you know the old mormon saying, “out of the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses”. I agree, too many and too different

LOL

Trying to pin down the right number is like trying to nail Jello (green) to a wall.

 

[TexanKnight]

LOL

Trying to pin down the right number is like trying to nail Jello (green) to a wall.

the difference between jello and the lds church is that jello, at least, has substance