How do Mormons accept Joseph Smith's claims of having seen God

[alexaustralia]

Smith’s first vision in which he claims to have seen God conflicts with the Bible, which says, “No man hath seen God at any time”(John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). In Exodus 33:20, God also says, “There shall no man see me and live.” Men cannot see God beacause He is Spirit(JOHN 4:24), and spirit is invisible( Col. 1:15, 1 Tim. 1:17), Invisible means it cannot be seen. 1 Tim. 6:16 also says He “dwells in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen nor can see.” I would like to understand how mormons accept Joseph Smith’s claims.

From memory (it has been a while since I looked at mormonism) they will bring up that Moses saw God “face to face” from this they deduct that if God has a face then a head and the rest follows.

Daniel Marsh,
I think you got confused with JW on this last bit

But, using the watchtower misreading that no one has ever seen God at anytime simply does not work.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi Alex, I am not confused. Arians like the Jehovah’s Witnesses have used those proof texts, and given them the intrepretation that no one has ever seen God at anytime. Over the years, I have noticed that interpretation slip into christian apologetics unchallenged. That unchallenged interpretation has been used against mormons. When you go back and study those proof texts, you will see that they do not teach how the watchtower has misintreted them to mean. In context of the gospels, when Jesus spoke of God, his hearers thought of God the Father, John later specifies that no one has seen the Father and that Jesus has made him known. In John’s letter, he is saying that everyday people generally do not see God face to face like Adam and Eve did before the fall and goes on to say if we do not love our brothern whom we can see then we do not love God whom we can not see.

Go back and study each of the proof texts. Read the gospels, you will see that when Jesus uses the word God often he means his Father.

 

[AWall]

Well, that is a completely nonsense answer on his part. Joseph Smith was practicing polygamy several years in secret before he finally admitted it, and when he did, he made it out that he was reluctantly obeying God’s order to take more wives. He claimed that he resisted, but that God told him that unless he obeyed, he’d be destroyed. When his wife, Emma, complained bitterly, she was also threatened with “destruction” via a revelation from God to… guess who?.. drum roll… Joseph Smith.

Recently I brought up this subject of Mormon polygamy to my fiance’s father. His reply was a very typical one, that I’ve heard several times from Mormons, and that is that polygamy was made necessary during the trek to Salt Lake because of a shortage of men. But this is not true. Whether there was or was not a “shortage” of men is beside the point. Polygamy is a sinful practice, without any possible justification under any circumstances. And, it remains a fact that a shortage of men had nothing to do with it. Joseph Smith was practicing it BEFORE the move to Salt Lake began, some ten years before he was murdered in 1844.

Actually it’s interesting to look at census numbers during that time b/c it totally does away with that claim.

wivesofjosephsmith.org/Why.htm
i4m.com/think/polygamy/utah_census.htm

Polygamy is something that really disgusted me and is one of many things that led me to leave the Mormon church.

 

[Kristine1957]

The church presents Joseph Smiths story as a lovely, spiritual, vision to a young boy in the woods…they convince you this is true…Futhermore, If you don’t believe Joseph Smith’s vision’s then the entire church doctrine falls apart.

 

[Allweather]

The church presents Joseph Smiths story as a lovely, spiritual, vision to a young boy in the woods…they convince you this is true…Futhermore, If you don’t believe Joseph Smith’s vision’s then the entire church doctrine falls apart.

My understanding is that this so-called vision wasn’t revealed by Joseph Smith until years later, and in each telling of it the circumstances and incidentals were changed and enlarged by him. Is this true according to your knowledge of it?

 

[PaulDupre]

There were several versions of the “First Vision”. The earliest ones recounted a visit by an angel only. Years later, Joseph said that Jesus (only) appeared to him that day. Finally, after Joseph’s death, the church published what is now the accepted version of the story, with the Father and the Son, both corporeal beings, appearing to Joseph in the woods.
Paul

 

[Kristine1957]

My understanding is that this so-called vision wasn’t revealed by Joseph Smith until years later, and in each telling of it the circumstances and incidentals were changed and enlarged by him. Is this true according to your knowledge of it?

Allweather: Joseph Smith wrote his earliest account of the First Vision in 1820. The one the Mormons use was written in 1838. There reasoning behind it is the stories were of heavenly visitations were both sacred, private, and controversial, so he had little incentive to publish them at the time. His first experience telling a minister about them in public led to immediate persecution, persecution which persisted throughout his life. (so the LDS Church says)

 

[Valke2]

Well, that is a completely nonsense answer on his part. Joseph Smith was practicing polygamy several years in secret before he finally admitted it, and when he did, he made it out that he was reluctantly obeying God’s order to take more wives. He claimed that he resisted, but that God told him that unless he obeyed, he’d be destroyed. When his wife, Emma, complained bitterly, she was also threatened with “destruction” via a revelation from God to… guess who?.. drum roll… Joseph Smith.

Recently I brought up this subject of Mormon polygamy to my fiance’s father. His reply was a very typical one, that I’ve heard several times from Mormons, and that is that polygamy was made necessary during the trek to Salt Lake because of a shortage of men. But this is not true. Whether there was or was not a “shortage” of men is beside the point. Polygamy is a sinful practice, without any possible justification under any circumstances. And, it remains a fact that a shortage of men had nothing to do with it. Joseph Smith was practicing it BEFORE the move to Salt Lake began, some ten years before he was murdered in 1844.

I don’t see how you can say it is a sinful practice under any circumstances, when it was practiced by many in the Bible and not condemed. At the very least, you have to admit there were circumstances when it was not sinful.

 

[Allweather]

I don’t see how you can say it is a sinful practice under any circumstances, when it was practiced by many in the Bible and not condemed. At the very least, you have to admit there were circumstances when it was not sinful.

When Jesus taught about divorce, he said that in the previous era God tolerated divorce because of the hardheadedness of the Hebrews. He then went on to speak of the plan of God, which is one man, one woman, no divorce, no adultery.

Also, when you look carefully at the various specifics in the OT where men had concubines, it was related to pagan practices, which were at odds with the Hebrew practices, and AFAIK always was associated with less-than-desireable results.

Are you defending polygamy? If so, by what authority?

 

[Nan_S]

When Jesus taught about divorce, he said that in the previous era God tolerated divorce because of the hardheadedness of the Hebrews. He then went on to speak of the plan of God, which is one man, one woman, no divorce, no adultery.

Also, when you look carefully at the various specifics in the OT where men had concubines, it was related to pagan practices, which were at odds with the Hebrew practices, and AFAIK always was associated with less-than-desireable results.

Are you defending polygamy? If so, by what authority?

I know someone will want to point to Jacob and his four.

The thing to remember is that Jacob and through him the rest of the world was only learning about God at the time; God had not yet given them his law, so they were proceeding as best they knew how.

Rachel, Leah and their maidservants were raised pagan. Jacob was tricked into marrying Leah, when he had contracted for Rachel. Both he and Laban knew that the agreement was for Rachel, but Laban held him to the strict wording of the agreement which did not specifically mention which daughter.

Nan

 

[Allweather]

I know someone will want to point to Jacob and his four.

The thing to remember is that Jacob and through him the rest of the world was only learning about God at the time; God had not yet given them his law, so they were proceeding as best they knew how.

Rachel, Leah and their maidservants were raised pagan. Jacob was tricked into marrying Leah, when he had contracted for Rachel. Both he and Laban knew that the agreement was for Rachel, but Laban held him to the strict wording of the agreement which did not specifically mention which daughter.

Nan

That’s right. Last week I went to a lecture by Tim Gray, in which he points out the statement in Gen 29:26 where Laban states: “It is not the custom in our country to marry off a younger dauther before an older one.” He connects this to the deception of Jacob in pretending to be Esau and falsely obtaining his father’s blessing, which should have gone to the elder Esau.

There are intricate, interlocking deceptions taking place among these various family factions. These polygamous liasons are NOT blessed by God, and could hardly be used to justify polygamy as if it were something looked upon with pleasure by the Creator, whose plan it was, as expressed in Adam and Eve, to be one man, one woman. Yet, the Mormons have done just that. AFAIK the Mormons are the only polygamous cult derived from either Judaism or Christianity. One wonders how lonely they must be, out there in Utah with their bizarre interpretations of Scripture, unable to practice their beloved ordinance because of state law.

 

[zerinus]

I know someone will want to point to Jacob and his four.

No need to point to “Jacob and his four”. There are lots more and better examples in the Bible.

Abraham, who was arguably the greatest prophet and patriarch of the OT this side of the Flood after Noah, was a polygamist. He not only married Hagar, he married may more wives and concubines after Isaac was born, and they bore him many children (Genesis 25:1-6; 1 Chronicles 1:32-33).

Moses, who was the greatest prophet of Israel until Jesus, practised polygamy, and had the express approval of God in doing so. He married an African woman, in addition to his first wife who had been the daughter of Jethro. When Aaron and Miriam murmured and complained about it, the Lord was highly displeased, and severely chastened them for doing so. You can read all about it in Numbers Ch. 12.

David had many wives, and God not only spoke of it approvingly, but indicated it was a blessing from the Lord to him:

2 Samuel 12:

7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;

8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

There are even indications that polygamy was practised in the early Christian church, and was considered a perfectly legitimate practice by the leadership of the church. I have already discussed that at length in other threads; and there is no need to rehash that all over again.

The thing to remember is that Jacob and through him the rest of the world was only learning about God at the time; God had not yet given them his law, so they were proceeding as best they knew how.

There is no evidence for that. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were all very great prophets of God, and knew a lot more about God and His ways than we do. Of Abraham the Lord said: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56). Abraham knew a lot more about Jesus than you and I do.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

There are even indications that polygamy was practised in the early Christian church, and was considered a perfectly legitimate practice by the leadership of the church.zerinus

There are no such indications. The Mormon innovation depends upon creative interpretations of NT that do not square in any way with the 2000 years of Christian history.

Polygamy has always been a sinful, criminal practice in Christendom, as well as in Christianity itself. Mormon interpretations of OT that polygamy was an approved thing of God are false, and cannot be reconciled with what is known about the Jews or the pagan cultures that surrounded them, and from which God had commanded them to be separated, a command they frequently offended by intermarriage with them.

In fact, most of Mormonism’s problems during the 19th century can be traced directly to their practice of polygamy. They are unique AFAIK in this polygamous regard among the American cults. None of the other cults, in spite of using very creative Biblical interpreations of Scripture, came to the conclusion that God had sanctioned polygamy. That is probably why the other cults were relatively ignored by mainstream American society. But polygamy could not be ignored, and it wasn’t. The Mormons were “persecuted” relentlessly by their neighbors as a result of this sinful, criminal behavior, which they made worse by attributing to a command of Almighty God. It wouldn’t be a stretch of historical interpretation to say that Joseph Smith was killed as a result of polygamy, although there is also a suggestion that his connections with Freemasonry had something to do with that, as well, but that is another story.

 

[zerinus]

There are no such indications. The Mormon innovation depends upon creative interpretations of NT that do not square in any way with the 2000 years of Christian history.

Polygamy has always been a sinful, criminal practice in Christendom, as well as in Christianity itself. Mormon interpretations of OT that polygamy was an approved thing of God are false, and cannot be reconciled with what is known about the Jews or the pagan cultures that surrounded them, and from which God had commanded them to be separated, a command they frequently offended by intermarriage with them.

In fact, most of Mormonism’s problems during the 19th century can be traced directly to their practice of polygamy. They are unique AFAIK in this polygamous regard among the American cults. None of the other cults, in spite of using very creative Biblical interpreations of Scripture, came to the conclusion that God had sanctioned polygamy. That is probably why the other cults were relatively ignored by mainstream American society. But polygamy could not be ignored, and it wasn’t. The Mormons were “persecuted” relentlessly by their neighbors as a result of this sinful, criminal behavior, which they made worse by attributing to a command of Almighty God. It wouldn’t be a stretch of historical interpretation to say that Joseph Smith was killed as a result of polygamy, although there is also a suggestion that his connections with Freemasonry had something to do with that, as well, but that is another story.

You are talking a load of rubbish. You produce no evidence for what you say except just bad-mouthing Mormonism; and no further comment is required.

zerinus

 

[water]

zerinus,

Since you are a Mormon, I was wondering how you recognize the next Joseph Smith to be your ‘leader’ (I am not sure if I call it right) and also a prophet? Is this person still claiming to see God as the very first Joseph Smith did?

Thanks!

 

[zerinus]

zerinus,

Since you are a Mormon, I was wondering how you recognize the next Joseph Smith to be your ‘leader’ (I am not sure if I call it right) and also a prophet? Is this person still claiming to see God as the very first Joseph Smith did?

Thanks!

I am not quite sure what you are trying to ask either! The LDS Church is a restoration of the original church of Christ. It is, and has always been led by true prophets and Apostles, as the ancient church used to be. A prophet is nothing more than a mouthpiece of God. He claims nothing more than being able to convey God’s word and will to man, in the generation in which he lives. Whether he “sees God” or not depends on the will of God concerning him. The answer to your question is Yes, the Church is led by such a prophet(s) and Apostles today.

zerinus

 

[water]

I am not quite sure what you are trying to ask either! The LDS Church is a restoration of the original church of Christ. It is, and has always been led by true prophets and Apostles, as the ancient church used to be. A prophet is nothing more than a mouthpiece of God. He claims nothing more than being able to convey God’s word and will to man, in the generation in which he lives. Whether he “sees God” or not depends on the will of God concerning him. The answer to your question is Yes, the Church is led by such a prophet(s) and Apostles today.

zerinus

Thanks zerinus for answering my questions. The reason I asked was because the original poster asking about how Mormons accepted Joseph Smith’s claim of seeing God. If that was true that He had seen God, then it must be one of many good reasons for those who followed him and formed the religion. Therefore, my question about seeing God was mentioned in regarding with the new leader(s).

 

[artist3189]

Memorize Isaiah 43:10 and 2 cor 4:4

2 Corinthians 4:4
In whom the **god of this world hath blinded **the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

The “god of this world” is not another “god” in the Mormon, or Gnostic sense, but money, power, etc and I’m sure you know that. They need to put it in the full context of what Paul was teaching and did in other letters, something that hasn’t changed much.

 

[Allweather]

You are talking a load of rubbish. You produce no evidence for what you say except just bad-mouthing Mormonism; and no further comment is required.

zerinus

Aha! So, by maintaining the obvious, which is that polygamy is sinful and criminal, I am “badmouthing Mormonism”.

Indeed, then, I must be. Mormonism is all about polygamy, isn’t it Zerinus? Frankly, I am amazed that you’ve allowed yourself to fall into the trap that Mormon leaders urge you to avoid, which is: Don’t talk about polygamy. If you must talk about it, frame it as something the Mormon pioneers had to do because of a shortage of men, or some such nonsense as that.

Please do keep defending it, even by means of your pathetic arguments that cannot be backed up one whit by evidence. Mormon women just LOVE to find out about the sex lives you little missionaries have in store for them.

 

[Catholic_Guy]

I am not quite sure what you are trying to ask either! The LDS Church is a restoration of the original church of Christ. It is, and has always been led by true prophets and Apostles, as the ancient church used to be. A prophet is nothing more than a mouthpiece of God. He claims nothing more than being able to convey God’s word and will to man, in the generation in which he lives. Whether he “sees God” or not depends on the will of God concerning him. The answer to your question is Yes, the Church is led by such a prophet(s) and Apostles today.

zerinus

Show me how it is a restoration of the Early Church. Nowhere in the NT, the ECF’s writings, or even the Apocryphal books can you find where Christ appointed a Prophet to be in charge with a required quorum of 12 apostles. Your apostasy theory is weakened more based the fact that the LDS Church believes that John the Apostle is not dead and still roaming the earth since the time of Christ. Did all of the Apostles die? How is this reconciled with:

D&C 7:1-3
1 And the Lord said unto me: John, my beloved, what desirest thou? For if you shall ask what you will, it shall be granted unto you.
2 And I said unto him: Lord, give unto me power over death, that I may live and bring souls unto thee.
3 And the Lord said unto me: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, because thou desirest this **thou shalt tarry until I come in my glory, and shalt prophesy before nations, kindreds, tongues and people. **

and

3 Nephi 28:4-9
4 And when he had spoken unto them, he turned himself unto the three, and said unto them: What will ye that I should do unto you, when I am gone unto the Father?
5 And they sorrowed in their hearts, for they durst not speak unto him the thing which they desired.
6** And he said unto them: Behold, I know your thoughts, and ye have desired the thing which John, my beloved, who was with me in my ministry, before that I was lifted up by the Jews, desired of me.**
7 Therefore, more blessed are ye, for ye shall never taste of death]; but ye shall live to behold all the doings of the Father unto the children of men, even until all things shall be fulfilled according to the will of the Father, when I shall come in my glory with the powers of heaven.
8 And ye shall never endure the pains of death; but when I shall come in my glory ye shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye from mortality to immortality; and then shall ye be blessed in the kingdom of my Father.
9 And again, ye shall not have pain while ye shall dwell in the flesh, neither sorrow save it be for the sins of the world; and all this will I do because of the thing which ye have desired of me, for ye have desired that ye might bring the souls of men unto me, while the world shall stand.

I think this brings up a lot of questions.

1. If John the Apostle has not died and is supposedly still among us teaching, how did God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit through John allow the church to enter into apostasy? Did his Apostolic Authority disappear or simply stop? How does this reconcile with your apologetics of “The Great Apostasy” when according to your own doctrine, not all the apostles died.

1. Why didn’t John prevent any writings, practices, and dogma of the Early Church from being lost if he is truly around to have kept them safe?
2. When Joseph Smith received the Melchizedek Priesthood and apostleship from Peter, James, and John; did John actually stroll up in his immortal flesh while Peter and James appeared in their angelic form?
3. Why are John and the three Nephites missing in action from the scene in the “True and Restored Church” in Salt Lake City? Why is John the Apostle who was given this authority directly by Christ during His ministry on Earth, not the head of his church? The same question applies to the three Nephites.

Pax Christi,

Catholic Guy