The First Vision

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Shulem goes to Nauvoo and confronts the prophet

Post by Shulem »

I’m getting in my time machine and going to Nauvoo to hear Joseph Smith preach in the “Meeting in the Grove, east of the Temple, June 16, 1844”. I’m going to confront the prophet about his doctrine of the Godhead and the plurality of Gods. This is an intervention of sorts!

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote: President Joseph Smith read the 3rd chapter of Revelation, and took for his text 1st chapter, 6th verse—“And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father: to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.”

It is altogether correct in the translation. Now, you know that of late some malicious and corrupt men have sprung up and apostatized from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and they declare that the Prophet believes in a plurality of Gods, and, lo and behold! we have discovered a very great secret, they cry—“The Prophet says there are many Gods, and this proves that he has fallen.”

Brother Joseph! Shulem here, hear me, please. I’m not here to tell you that you’ve fallen but I have a problem with you teaching the plurality of Gods when that is something you did NOT teach prior to 1835. You always maintained the teachings of the bible and Book of Mormon with regard to the Father and Son being one God manifesting in their respective roles. How can you begin to wonder how so many of the brethren have fallen away from the Church ever since you’ve been preaching this strange doctrine of the plurality of Gods?

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote: It has been my intention for a long time to take up this subject and lay it clearly before the people, and show what my faith is in relation to this interesting matter. I have contemplated the saying of Jesus (Luke 17th chapter, 26th verse)—“And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man.” And if it does rain, I’ll preach this doctrine, for the truth shall be preached.

Just how long is a long time? You didn’t preach these things in 1830, 1831, 1832, 1833, and 1834! The doctrine of plurality of Gods is causing quite a stir, even today, is it not?

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote: I will preach on the plurality of Gods. I have selected this text for that express purpose. I wish to declare I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods. It has been preached by the Elders for fifteen years.

Not quite 15 years, brother Joseph! In the early days of Kirtland you never preached these things as you do now and when your own hand penned the 1832 account of the First Vision you did not write anything like you did later in 1838. The story changed, did it not? Brother Fredrick G. Williams was your scribe and brother Cowdery was your right-hand man and they knew nothing about you seeing Two Persons in your First Vision at the grove. No one ever said anything about Two Persons or that the Father pointed to the Son when they appeared to you until you declared these things in 1838. Not even your own mother was told such a thing.

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote: I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods. If this is in accordance with the New Testament, lo and behold! we have three Gods anyhow, and they are plural; and who can contradict it?

No sir, you have not always declared these things. You came up with these ideas much later. The Lectures on Faith teach that the Father is a Spirt but the Son is made flesh. They are one God and that is what you originally taught. You never said anything about “Three Gods” in your earlier teachings. Everyone understand your teachings to agree with the bible and Book of Mormon that teaches the Father and Son are one and the Book of Mormon teaches that Jesus is the very Father in Heaven manifested in the flesh.

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote: Our text says, “And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father.” The Apostles have discovered that there were Gods above, for Paul says God was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. My object was to preach the scriptures, and preach the doctrine they contain, there being a God above, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. I am bold to declare I have taught all the strong doctrines publicly, and always teach stronger doctrines in public than in private.

Sir, the Book of Revelation does not say there is a God above the Father of Jesus Christ. It doesn’t say that and there is not a Christian sect or religion that teaches such a thing. Not even the Book of Mormon which teaches there is only one God. I urge you to open the Adam Clarke Commentary and read what is said with regard to Revelation 1:6. Nothing is said about the Father having a Father as you imply.

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote: John was one of the men, and apostles declare they were made kings and priests unto God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It reads just so in the Revelation, Hence the doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine. It is all over the face of the Bible. It stands beyond the power of controversy. A wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein.

No, brother Joseph, that is not what it says. It says no such thing! It says, “And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father” meaning that we are a kingdom of priests unto God who just so happens to be Christ’s Father. Recall Jesus in the bible saying, “I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” Hence, we are to become a kingdom of priests unto God who is the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Your declaration that the passage in Revelation implies that the Father has a Father is totally unfounded and you are the only Christian on this earth that teaches such a thing ever since you converted to the doctrine of the plurality of Gods. Your new doctrine is not Christian.

Sir, you have turned Mormonism on its head!


To be continued...
Last edited by Shulem on Sun Nov 28, 2021 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 3340
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: The First Vision

Post by Philo Sofee »

Shulem wrote:
Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:18 pm
Joseph Smith emended his story in 1838 to add that Heavenly Father “pointed” at his Beloved Son as they stood above him in the air.

Joseph Smith wrote:When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

In my view, this introduction and form of communication is on a Romper Room level -- it’s like being at Sesame Street. I don’t believe it! You’d think Joseph Smith would have taken it to a higher level without relying on the crude nature of a human body to communicate language from one being to another. Telepathy or exchange of thoughts through the power of mind alone would have been more believable rather than being told God had to actually open his mouth, roll his tongue, and point to someone in order to convey understanding. Words need NOT have been said. Fingers need NOT be pointed. The crude nature of Smith’s testimonial leads me to detect that his understanding of the supernatural and divine was on a level a lot lower than I had previously thought. Joseph Smith was a total fake! He really was a con artist but a very good one at that! The idea of a Heavenly Father with a body having to move lips and point in order to communicate is all the evidence I need from Smith to know he was making it up.

Prior to the 1838 account, nobody had ever heard of Joseph Smith describing Two Persons and how one pointed to the other. Oliver Cowdery had never heard it. Not even Joseph Smith’s own mother. Nobody! The concept of Heavenly Father’s fleshy finger pointing at Jesus is simply NOT true. It never happened. The whole thing was made up out of Joseph Smith’s imagination.
I can't wait to see the 2 point conversion Moksha makes on this one!!!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: The First Vision

Post by Shulem »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Sun Nov 28, 2021 5:25 am
I can't wait to see the 2 point conversion Moksha makes on this one!!!

Oh yeah, I forgot about the two point conversion. If we run the score up too high it will look like poor sportsmanship.

Imagine Daniel C. Peterson coming here to have a friendly discussion with us. He’s more than welcome to come in and discuss these matters. Nobody will be rude to him and he will be afforded every right and privilege this board has to offer and be a guest of honor on red carpet.

What do you say, Dan? How can you resist the Celestial Forum? Don’t you get a little board over there on your blog? Come on over here and tell me what you really think about the handwritten version of the First Vision account. Note therein that Smith had grave concerns about what his mother thought and he scratched her out and handed the pen over to Fredrick G. Williams. Have you ever wondered why he did that? What was it about mother Smith that set Joseph on edge? Hmmm.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Shulem goes to Nauvoo and confronts the prophet

Post by Shulem »

Joseph Smith uses St. Paul to justify his NEW doctrine of the plurality of Gods:

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote:Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many. I want to set it forth in a plain and simple manner; but to us there is but one God—that is pertaining to us; and he is in all and through all. But if Joseph Smith says there are Gods many and Lords many, they cry, “Away with him! Crucify him! Crucify him!”

A flare for the dramatic, oh my, brother Joseph! What ever have you in mind now?

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote:Mankind verily say that the Scriptures are with them. Search the Scriptures, for they testify of things that these apostates would gravely pronounce blasphemy. Paul, if Joseph Smith is a blasphemer, you are. I say there are Gods many and Lords many, but to us only one, and we are to be in subjection to that one, and no man can limit the bounds or the eternal existence of eternal time. Hath he beheld the eternal world, and is he authorized to say that there is only one God? He makes himself a fool if he thinks or says so, and there is an end of his career or progress in knowledge. He cannot obtain all knowledge, for he has sealed up the gate to it.

And just how many Gods are there, Joseph? Can you number them? Can God number them? You know that according to the revelation you gave in the Book of Moses, God created millions of earths just like this one in which we live today and many have passed and many are yet to be formed or organized. But your revelation says that all of them are numbered, thus, they can be neatly arranged on a shelf so God can see all of them and describe them in perfect detail. He counts them! Right? So, what of the Gods? Can they be numbered and set on a shelf and counted in perfect order from start to finish? What is that number?

Oh, brother Joseph, look at the hole have you have dug for yourself! How will the FIRST (#1) God of the Gods ever be found and what is his origin?

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote:Some say I do not interpret the Scripture the same as they do. They say it means the heathen’s gods. Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many; and that makes a plurality of Gods, in spite of the whims of all men. Without a revelation, I am not going to give them the knowledge of the God of heaven. You know and I testify that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods. I have it from God, and get over it if you can. I have a witness of the Holy Ghost, and a testimony that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods in the text.

Brother Joseph, I happen to know that you’ve borrowed a lot of your material or that many of your revelations were influenced by the Adam Clarke Commentary. I’ve documented many of them here at Radio Free Mormon: “Borrowed Robes”. Have you read what Adam Clarke said about St. Paul’s statement in which you address? Have you considered what he might have to say? How is it you depend on Adam Clarke so much on one hand and then in another you dump him first chance you get?

Permit me to read from the Adam Clarke Commentary for 1 Corinthians 8:5 to you and the entire congregation present here with us today. The saints in Nauvoo deserve to hear from a biblical expert of such great renown:

Adam Clarke Commentary wrote: There be that are called gods — There are many images that are supposed to be representations of divinities: but these divinities are nothing, the figments of mere fancy; and these images have no corresponding realities. Whether in heaven or in earth — As the sun, moon, planets, stars, the ocean, rivers, trees, &c. And thus there are, nominally, gods many, and lords many.

And one Lord Jesus — Only one visible Governor of the world and the Church, by whom are all things: who was the Creator, as he is the Upholder of the universe. And we by him, being brought to the knowledge of the true God, by the revelation of Jesus Christ; for it is the only begotten Son alone that can reveal the Father. The gods of whom the apostle speaks were their divinities, or objects of religious worship; the lords were the rulers of the world, such emperors, who were considered next to gods, and some of them were deified. In opposition to those gods he places GOD the Father, the fountain of plenitude and being; and in opposition to the lords he places Jesus Christ, who made and who governs all things. We, as creatures, live in reference, ειςαυτον, to him, God the Father, who is the fountain of our being: and, as Christians, we live δι αυτου, by or through him, Jesus Christ; by whom we are bought, enlightened, pardoned, and saved.

In whom will the saints believe? Joseph Smith or Adam Clarke? Let it be understood that Paul had every allusion to the heathen gods when he made his statement that there are gods many, and lords many. The many testimonies given by St. Paul verify this to be so and Adam Clarke has correctly interpreted the New Testament apostle while Joseph Smith misreads Paul and attempts to convert Christianity into the plurality of Gods! Give heed to the testimony given by St. Paul himself who bore witness what he meant by gods many, and lords many:

Acts 14:11 wrote:And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.
Acts 17:16 wrote:Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.
Galatians 4:8 wrote:Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.



BONUS FEATURE:

Internet famous, Dr. Kerry Shirts, presents a stunning and informative 1 hour video on how there were gods many, and lords many throughout ancient Israelite history. The Old Testament Jehovah and the Christian Godhead consisting of Father, Son, and Spirit were simply two of the many gods worshipped by various peoples in the holy land during biblical times. An excellent presentation which I highly recommend!

The Backyard Professor: Elohim Forgot His own Wife in Joseph Smith's True Restoration?! Absurd!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Finger of God

Post by Shulem »

Times and Seasons 1842 wrote:
When the light rested upon me I saw two personages (whose brightness and glory defy all description) standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name, and said, (pointing to the other.) “This is my beloved Son, hear him.”

Image

Now, please recall how utterly shocked the brother of Jared was when he saw the finger of God at the moment God reached through the veil to touch the stones and cause them to light up as if by magic. The brother of Jared was taken back and at that point was deciphering instantly within his own mind how God could be in the appearance of mortal man. Of course, this is all Joseph Smith’s personal narrative in putting this fictional story together in which to make it match and agree with Old and New Testament appearances of God. In effect, it was Joseph Smith, not the brother of Jared that was taken back in seeing the finger of the Old Testament God who had yet to manifest as Jesus of Nazareth! Joseph Smith was expressing his own sense of awe and wonder! (The secret in understanding the mystery of the Book of Mormon is in knowing that it’s secretly all about HIM! Joseph was living his personal fantasies in the Book of Mormon!)

Considering the impact that the finger of God had on Joseph Smith via the brother of Jared, there comes with it an automatic demand in expecting Joseph Smith to experience his own shock and awe in seeing the Father’s finger that is doing more than magically lighting stones but is literally POINTING at the Son of God who is a separate and distinct Personage having his own body of flesh and bone. This is something that could hardly be overlooked or forgotten. THIS WOULD HAVE BLOWN THE SOCKS OF JOSEPH SMITH! This is one of the most amazing claims ever made by anyone! This is something that could hardly be forgotten or misunderstood. But had this been the case or really happened, he would have told others prior to 1838 and there would be a testimony of it in the 1832 First Vision account. Leaving out the Finger of God and that the Father is his own Person is all the proof one needs in knowing that Smith made it up later in order to advance his changing theology.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Gordon B. Hinckley

Post by Shulem »

Image


It did NOT occur. I’m sorry, President Hinckley, but your faith was entirely based on something that was not true. This is, however, not new but has been a part of the human experience ever since the world began. You are a victim of someone else’s circumstances and were pulled into it because that is what you needed to experience. It’s sad that you were never able to figure that out! That is where you failed.

RIP
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 3510
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: The First Vision

Post by Moksha »

While President Hinckley's message does seem to paint LDS members into a corner with the veracity of the First Vision, they still have the capacity to compartmentalize and feel honest about their participation. The Church represents more than just Joseph Smith and almost 15-year-old girls; after all, they will be high school sophomores next year and eligible to take Drivers Ed the year after that!!!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Gods

Post by Shulem »

Let’s review the part in Smith’s sermon about how he (several years previously) at the time he was translating the papyrus managed to learn Hebrew and that he is more capable of interpreting biblical texts than Christians who belong to other sects. Notice Smith’s personal pride and even arrogance seems to radiate as he presents himself as a rather formidable translator of Hebrew scripture.

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote:I will show from the Hebrew Bible that I am correct, and the first word shows a plurality of Gods; and I want the apostates and learned men to come here and prove to the contrary, if they can. An unlearned boy must give you a little Hebrew.

Smith arrogantly affirms that the word “God” in the Genesis creation account should have been translated as “Gods”. Recall that this translation is consistently applied to the creation account in the Book of Abraham starting with “the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth.” Without mentioning it specifically, Smith proceeds to validate his Book of Abraham creation account which he published just two years previously in the Times and Seasons where the plurality of Gods is affirmed repeatedly throughout that account. He does this by introducing the plurality of Gods in the Geneses account in order to validate his Book of Abraham translation.

Joseph Smith, 1844 wrote:Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aushamayeen vehau auraits, rendered by King James’ translators, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” I want to analyze the word Berosheit. Rosh, the head; Sheit, a grammatical termination; the Baith was not originally put there when the inspired man wrote it, but it has been since added by an old Jew. Baurau signifies to bring forth; Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God, in the singular number; and by adding the word heim, it renders it Gods. It read first, “In the beginning the head of the Gods brought forth the Gods,” or, as others have translated it, “The head of the Gods called the Gods together.” I want to show a little learning as well as other fools. The head God organized the heavens and the earth. I defy all the world to refute me. In the beginning the heads of the Gods organized the heavens and the earth. Now the learned priests and the people rage, and the heathen imagine a vain thing. If we pursue the Hebrew text further, it reads, “Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aushamayeen vehau auraits.”—“The head one of the Gods said, Let us make a man in our own image.” I once asked a learned Jew, “If the Hebrew language compels us to render all words ending in heim in the plural, why not render the first Eloheim plural?” He replied, “That is the rule with few exceptions; but in this case it would ruin the Bible.” He acknowledged I was right. I came here to investigate these things precisely as I believe them. Hear and judge for yourselves; and if you go away satisfied, well and good. In the very beginning the Bible shows there is a plurality of Gods beyond the power of refutation. It is a great subject I am dwelling on. The word Eloheim ought to be in the plural all the way through—Gods. The heads of the Gods appointed one God for us; and when you take [that] view of the subject, its sets one free to see all the beauty, holiness and perfection of the Gods. All I want is to get the simple, naked truth, and the whole truth.

Note that Smith says that the word Eloheim in the creation account should have been translated as “Gods” and that is exactly what he did in the Book of Abraham when he learned Hebrew and began to formulate new understandings of the Godhead and how he began to express God in the plural sense.

But with all this comes a big problem. A startling contradiction on Smith’s part in which I will expose in my next post! Buckle up, Philo, this is big!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Genesis Chapter One of the New Translation

Post by Shulem »

I really need to cut to the chase and not continue with a long exposé (fancy word) in order to paint the picture I’m trying to express. This thread is about the First Vision and how Joseph Smith knowingly changed his story and made things up as he went along. But with this, comes an incredible amount of pompous pride on Joseph’s part -- he was a double tongued hypocrite. He talked out of both sides of his mouth giving conflicting messages all in the name of revelation.

Consider the pompous sermon cited earlier compared to the revelations Smith gave through his New Translation of the Bible which was never properly published during his lifetime other than excerpts given in various Church periodicals. But these things were not generally known or understood by all the members of the Church during 1830 to 1844. The New Translation of the Bible in raw form existed as a manuscript locked up in the President’s office. Excerpts given in the Church periodicals went by the wayside.

Old Testament Revision 1

The D&C states that God inspired Joseph Smith to translate the Old Testament through revelation. This includes additional material given of the ministry of Enoch and visions of Moses. But the foundation of this work is the Genesis creation account given by Moses and that “GOD” himself is the Creator, the Chief Cornerstone to that work upon which everything is built.

Joseph Smith’s New Translation of Moses’s creation account given in 1830 in conjunction with his 1832 First Vision account is an indictment against his 1844 hypocrisy in covering those things up and publishing the Book of Abraham creation account (Gods) as if that was his original understanding since he founded the Church. The sermon given by Smith in 1844 and the publication of the Book of Abraham in 1842 contradicts Smith’s earlier New Translation of the Bible and his original belief that God is God (Book of Moses), not Gods as given in the Book of Abraham.

Clearly, we see that Joseph Smith contradicted himself and covered up his original doctrine of the SINGULAR GOD into a new scenario consisting of PLURAL GODS. Smith’s First Vision account would forever remain in the letter book locked up in the President’s office. There is would remain, forever, unpublished, hidden away, until such time as Joseph Fielding Smith got his paws on it and cut out the page. He then hid it just as his great uncle Joseph did and for the same reason.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: The First Vision

Post by Shulem »

Alma 11 wrote:
26 And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God?

27 And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God.

28 Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God?

29 And he answered, No.

“No” means “no”. What part of “no” (n + o) do u not understand? Is Jesus Christ a sinner? No, he is not! Is there more than one Heavenly Father? No, there is one Heavenly Father only!

So, when Joseph Smith said “no”, he meant what he said at the time he said it. But Smith is double tongued and will change his story to meet whatever needs he feels is necessary to achieve his aim. And often, that aim was to obtain more women for himself. Smith loved women and the more the merrier!

There is no more than “one God” according to Joseph Smith’s theology when he dictated the Book of Mormon and conceived the story of his First Vision in the grove. Never at any time was there more than “one God”, not until he got the papyrus and began to change his theology into the doctrine of plural Gods.
Post Reply