Flaws in the first vision story?

[Reid]

The “First Vision” story in the form presented to us by our Mormon friends was unknown until 1838, eighteen years after its alleged occurrence and almost ten years after Smith had begun his missionary efforts. The oldest (but quite different) version of the vision is in Smith’s own handwriting, dating from about 1832 (still at least eleven years afterwards), and says that only one personage, Jesus Christ, appeared to him. It also mentions nothing about a revival. It also contradicts the later account as to whether Smith had already decided that no church was true. Still a third version of this event is recorded as a recollection in Smith’s diary, fifteen years after the alleged vision, where one unidentified “personage” appeared, then another, with a message implying that neither was the Son. They were accompanied by many “angels,” which are not mentioned in the official version you have been told about. Which version is correct, if any? Why was this event, now said by the church to be so important, unknown for so long?

 

[Casen]

Please post references when you make accusations!

I know of four versions of the First Vision that Joseph Smith published over the years. They are all different in that they emphasize different aspects of the event but they are all compatible. This is not unlike the four Gospels which cover Christ’s ministry yet were written for different audiences (Jews vs. Gentiles, etc.) and emphasize different aspects of His ministry. I haven’t seen a contradiction in the First Vision accounts but if you’ve found something and would post your reference we could discuss it.

 

[arieh0310]

Casen:

Please post references when you make accusations!

I know of four versions of the First Vision that Joseph Smith published over the years. They are all different in that they emphasize different aspects of the event but they are all compatible. This is not unlike the four Gospels which cover Christ’s ministry yet were written for different audiences (Jews vs. Gentiles, etc.) and emphasize different aspects of His ministry. I haven’t seen a contradiction in the First Vision accounts but if you’ve found something and would post your reference we could discuss it.

There are a few problems with your argument. 1) These various accounts do not provide different “aspects” but set forth flatly contradictory statements; 2) the accounts do change the basic message of the first vision; and 3) differences in the Gospel accounts (which are easily explainable) do not lend to the irreconcilable contradictions in the first vision accounts.

I also find it interesting that you would use the Bible to prove your point. “Who, in his right mind, could, for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the Bible has escaped pollution?” (Orson Pratt). Why would you use “contradictions” in a book your faith calls wholly corrupt to prove contradictions in the first vision account do not exist. And why would the Book of Mormon use hundreds of direct KJV quotes (including errors in translations of the time) if the Bible was so corrupt?

 

[arieh0310]

Casen:

Please post references when you make accusations!

I know of four versions of the First Vision that Joseph Smith published over the years. They are all different in that they emphasize different aspects of the event but they are all compatible. This is not unlike the four Gospels which cover Christ’s ministry yet were written for different audiences (Jews vs. Gentiles, etc.) and emphasize different aspects of His ministry. I haven’t seen a contradiction in the First Vision accounts but if you’ve found something and would post your reference we could discuss it.

Examples of contradictions:

Personage(s)
1832 version: Smith claimed only a vision of Christ
1838-9 version: Smith claimed both Father and Son appeared
Seeking God
1832 version: Bible reading stirred Smith to seek God
1838-9 version: A revival motivated Smith
Churches wrong
1832 version: Smith already knew all churches were wrong
1838-9 version: the two personages told Smith they were wrong

There is also a problem with the revival portion of his vision as there is no historical evidence of a revival going near where he lived at the time of the vision.

I like this timeline.

 

[ForeverAdam]

“Which version is correct, if any?”

Let the early LDS leaders speak for themselves:

Wilford Woodruff said in 1855:

“The same organization and Gospel that Christ died for … is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God, out of heaven, who held converse with man, and revealed unto him the darkness that enveloped the world … He told him the Gospel was not among men, and that there was not a true organization of His kingdom in the world” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 196).

~

Orson Hyde in 1854:

“Some one may say, ‘If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?’ Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 33).

~

John Taylor in 1879:

“None of them was right, just as it was when the Prophet Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right that he might join it. The answer was that none of them are right” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 20, p. 167).

~

It is clear that an angel was supposed to have appeared to Smith, and not the Father and the Son. If not, then why did nobody know of this until around the the beginning of the 20th century? Also, why did Orson Hyde go out of the way to explain how the “First Vision” account could be valid even though it didn’t contain a vision of the Savior? It’s clear - the “First Vision” account has been changed. And, now, the question is, where does that leave people’s “testimony” of such an account. I can testify (no pun intended) that I have felt a slight “burning in the bosom” for the story of how Joseph Smith saw the Father and the Son. However, if this is an add-on to the original account, does this mean my “testimony” of it was simply my emotions reacting to a powerful story? And if so, does that not place a shadow of doubt over all “testimonies” that LDS experience over the message of their Church, circa 2005?

In Christ,

Adam

 

[Paul_G]

"Which version is correct…

Here is a more complete explanation

 

[Casen]

Having read the different accounts I don’t see a discrepancy, only that different aspects of the experience were emphasized. In the 1832 account Joseph simply stated that the heavens were opened “and I saw the Lord and he spake until me…” However, nothing in this account states that there was ONLY one personage. If you tell someone that your priest stopped by to talk to you does that mean that he couldn’t have had someone with him? The 1832 account was meant to emphasize that the Lord had visited Joseph Smith. If you actually read all four accounts you’ll see that they are really all in harmony.

I made reference to the Four Gospels earlier because we find that the authors emphasized different aspects of Christ’s ministry in their writings and were writing for different audiences and sometimes they even disagreed. They didn’t agree on how many angels were present at Christ’s tomb but I don’t think that’s a reason to reject the resurrection.

 

[Reid]

utlm.org/onlinebooks/mclaims1.htm

The four gospels were written by four different authors inspired by God, in the four gospels not one contradicts the other.

You made it known that you know of the 4 different first vision stories yet you say there is no contradiction.

But the fact is the stories are different, yet are written by one author.

Why did JS write about just one Jesus Christ in one hand written document? To whom was he writting to? Why did he not mention the Father and Son vision?

There was no revival the year JS claimed to have the vision.

Can you please explain to us how these stories fit together?

God and Jesus having a body contradicts the bible, for no man can see God.

Later I will pull quotes from the witness’s some claimed to see the vision with there spiritual eye, others claimed the vision came to them in a dream.

11 witness’s plus JS = 12 how original dont you think.
yet knowone else was allowed to see and suddenly they are no longer with us.

 

[Casen]

utlm.org/onlinebooks/mclaims1.htm

The four gospels were written by four different authors inspired by God, in the four gospels not one contradicts the other.

You made it known that you know of the 4 different first vision stories yet you say there is no contradiction.

But the fact is the stories are different, yet are written by one author.

Why did JS write about just one Jesus Christ in one hand written document? To whom was he writting to? Why did he not mention the Father and Son vision?

Reid,
You’re jumping around so much I can’t keep up. Haven’t you ever had an experience and later retold the story differently to different people? You might tell the long version with every detail to a close friend and you might tell a shorter version to an associate. It doesn’t mean you were lying in either case. The different versions Joseph Smith wrote don’t contradict each other. For the life of me I can’t figure out why this is so difficult to comprehend.

Reid:

There was no revival the year JS claimed to have the vision.

It was 1819 that the Methodists of the Genesee Conference met for a week in Vienna (later called Phelps) which is only 13 miles from the Smith farm. About 110 ministers from the region attended. The Geneva Presbytery, which included churches around the Smith farm, stated in February, 1820 that, “during the past year more have been received into the communion of the Churches than perhaps in any former year.”

Reid:

God and Jesus having a body contradicts the bible, for no man can see God.

…for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
(Old Testament | Genesis 32:30)

Reid:

Later I will pull quotes from the witness’s some claimed to see the vision with there spiritual eye, others claimed the vision came to them in a dream.

11 witness’s plus JS = 12 how original dont you think.
yet knowone else was allowed to see and suddenly they are no longer with us

Now you’re jumping to the witnesses of the plates. OK, we can cover this again if you like. Their testimonies are pretty compelling and they did indeed physically see the plates and the eight witnesses also testified that they physically handled them. There were also at least two women that testified to having seen the plates bringing the witness account including Joseph Smith to 14.

 

[Reid]

Again you quote scripture but you take it out of context to build your argument.

Genesis 32 verse 31 not 30 states “Jacob named the place Peniel, “Because I have seen God face to face,” he said yet my life is spared,”

The name Peniel is explained as meaning the face of God.

Go back and read Genesis 16 verse 13
"To the Lord who spoke to her she gave a name, saying You are the God of Vision she meant, Have I really seen God and remained alive after my vision?

The God of Vision: in Hebrew, el-roi; hence the name of the spring. remained alive: for the ancient notion that a person died on seeing God.

GN 32,31; Ex 20,19; Dt 4,33; Jgs 13,22

Now to build your case you would have to take Gn 32, 31 literal and eliminate the other verses that contradict your statement.

Its funny how you use a verse to build an argument only when to take that verse out of context to build your doctrine but when other verses disagree with your doctrine well it must then be a fraud.

That being said I know that there is nothing you can say to make me believe that your faith on the foundation of JS is correct and I know there is nothing I can say to prove to you that the JS story has holes.

If I am blinded by your truth or if you are blinded by my truth well I believe that is a blessing by our Creator so that on our last day if we didnt know better than how could we be punished.

Again later I have found quotes from the witness’s that were interviewed and their stories changed too, I will find those later and post them for your comments.

 

[arieh0310]

Casen:

I made reference to the Four Gospels earlier because we find that the authors emphasized different aspects of Christ’s ministry in their writings and were writing for different audiences and sometimes they even disagreed. They didn’t agree on how many angels were present at Christ’s tomb but I don’t think that’s a reason to reject the resurrection.

The big difference between the Gospel narratives and JS first vision account is the number of people involved. At the empty tomb there are several women with different perspectives being described by 4 different authors. All the attempts to harmonize the Gospel accounts are speculative, but it can be done very easily

With the first vision story you have one witness and one author. Did JS witness this singular event from several vantage points like the women at the tomb did?

 

[Casen]

arieh0310:

With the first vision story you have one witness and one author. Did JS witness this singular event from several vantage points like the women at the tomb did?

Nope, he just emphasized different parts of the experience at different times. As I said before, haven’t you ever related a personal experience differently, depending on your audience? I might tell my wife every detail of an experience but give a shorter version to someone else without there being any discrepancy. I honestly can’t see what all the fuss is about here. Read the different published First Vision accounts and they don’t contradict.

 

[arieh0310]

Casen:

Nope, he just emphasized different parts of the experience at different times. As I said before, haven’t you ever related a personal experience differently, depending on your audience? I might tell my wife every detail of an experience but give a shorter version to someone else without there being any discrepancy. I honestly can’t see what all the fuss is about here. Read the different published First Vision accounts and they don’t contradict.

The Nov.14, 1835 Account (Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, p. 84, also An American Prophet’s Record, p. 59) Smith related his story to Erastus Holmes:

“…I received the first visitation of Angels which was when I was about 14 years old…”

Joseph related his first vision to two different men. Both accounts relate seeing angels but not God or Jesus.

1. The Nov. 9, 1835 Account (Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, pp. 75-76, 1984 ed., p. 105 in the 2002 edition. Also in An American Prophet’s Record, p. 51. This account appeared in the serial printing of Smith’s history in the Millennial Star, Vol. 15, p. 396. However, this account has been deleted from the History of the Church, Vol. 2, p. 304.)

So, there were angels there too? Was this a spiritual ho-down? Who spoke to him in the grove? Jesus, or the Father, or angels, or all of them? Did the angels simply repeat what Jesus told Smith? They seem to be conveying the same message in the early versions of the first vision that Smith later claims was given to him by the Son.

 

[Casen]

There’s a pretty good summary of the 1828, 1835, 1838 and 1842 versions of the First Vision here:

fairlds.org/apol/brochures/firstvision.pdf

and it even includes a little chart identifying the differences between them. As to wether or not angles were present I guess only Joseph Smith would be in a position to say. If you think JS was a fraud I don’t think it matters much what he said. And if you believe he was a true prophet of God and he said he saw angles… well, I guess you would believe him.

 

[arieh0310]

Casen:

If you think JS was a fraud I don’t think it matters much what he said. And if you believe he was a true prophet of God and he said he saw angles… well, I guess you would believe him.

If you think JS is a true prophet of God then I guess no amount of irrefutable evidence will convince you otherwise.

 

[ForeverAdam]

Paul G,

I read through the article you linked. I agree that Smith began formulating certain elements (i.e. two distinct personages) in the current version of the “First Vision” story in the 1840s (or maybe a little earlier), but the fact that so many (the tide began to change in the 1870/80s) of the early LDS leaders spoke of God sending angels to Smith in the “First Vision” and no mention of the Savior (at least in many of their accounts), suggests that there was more than one version of the “First Vision” account, which bespeaks a possible change in its content. Sorry, but the view that “angels” could mean God sounds like special pleading just as the FARMS view that people of Smith’s time referred to heavenly beings as “salamanders” when the Hoffman forgeries were in vouge.

In Christ,

Adam

 

[Casen]

arieh0310:

If you think JS is a true prophet of God then I guess no amount of irrefutable evidence will convince you otherwise.

I haven’t see the irrefutable evidence yet. Please present it.

 

[stillsearching]

Casen:

There’s a pretty good summary of the 1828, 1835, 1838 and 1842 versions of the First Vision here:

fairlds.org/apol/brochures/firstvision.pdf

and it even includes a little chart identifying the differences between them. As to wether or not angles were present I guess only Joseph Smith would be in a position to say. If you think JS was a fraud I don’t think it matters much what he said. And if you believe he was a true prophet of God and he said he saw angles… well, I guess you would believe him.

Casen, you have us all wrong. We believe absolutely JS saw many “angles” in his lifetime and he tried them all.

 

[arieh0310]

Casen:

I haven’t see the irrefutable evidence yet. Please present it.

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post wasn’t that JS saw angels, I fully believe that anyone (whether he is a prophet or not) can have angelic visions. What I was trying to convey is that the message given to him in the grove is sometimes given to him by angels, sometimes by the Son alone, and sometimes by the Son and the Father; sometimes he already new all churches were wrong, and sometimes Jesus (or an angel or whatever) informs him they are all wrong; sometimes a revival gets him looking for God (a reveval that never took place), and sometimes it was Bible study. How can one eyewitness author give such wildly different (and historically inacurate) descriptions of one event?

 

[majick275]

you might also want to look at the biography of Joseph Smith that his mother Lucy Mack Smith wrote. The LDS church has tried to spin this many times but you can still find what she originally wrote.

Joseph Sr. (his Father) also had visions. Lucy wrote these down in this book. I believe that some of these served as inspiration for parts of the Book of Mormon. (Lehi’s vision especially) But that is just my own opinion after reading having read both the BoM and the Lucy Mack Smith biography of Joseph smith.

In any case, prophetic dreams and visions as well as angelic visitations seemd to have been less rare in the Smith household than in other folks homes.