First vision... is this really true?

[_squawkeye]

Was just pulling out of the drive at my buds place and he got a call that three neighbors were on the way with deer sausage, deer pepperoni and 100lbs of fresh processed elk meat for me. So, waited inside(it is 4 below zero out) and while doing so he pointed me to what I copy and paste here. Read it and see if it makes sense to you. If it is true it is way different from what the Salt Lakers are saying these days.

Now they have arrived and I have to go and pack the extra cooler section of the Suburban with snow to keep the meat cold as I drive to Iowa. (Heaven to those who believe in Baseball & truth)

----

The First Vision Was Not Taught Until 22 Years After It Occurred
Article Archived: Sunday, Dec 28, 2008, at 09:19 AM
Stored Under Topic: FIRST VISION
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: SpongeBob SquareGarments




The First Vision wasn't even known by church members until 1842, and even then it wasn't very important. Joseph said that he was persecuted for telling people that he had seen a vision. There is simply no evidence that Joseph told anyone about the vision until many years later and not until after the Book of Mormon was published. There are no accounts in the newspapers, by neighbors, preachers or even by the members of Joseph's own family. There is much evidence to indicate that the First Vision either never really happened or was very different than we've been taught.

James B. Allen, who served as assistant church historian, frankly admitted that the story of the first vision "was not given general circulation in the 1830's." (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, p.33). Dr. Allen makes some startling concessions in this article. He admits, for instance, that "none of the available contemporary writings about Joseph Smith in the 1830's, none of the publications of the Church in that decade, and no contemporary journal or correspondence yet discovered mentions the story of the first vision...." Dr. Allen goes on to state that in the 1830's "the general membership of the Church knew little, if anything, about it." Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, pages 29-45.

"As far as Mormon literature is concerned, there was apparently no reference to Joseph Smith's first vision in any published material in the 1830's. Joseph Smith's history, which was begun in 1838, was not published until it ran serially in the Times and Seasons in 1842. The famous "Wentworth Letter," which contained a much less detailed account of the vision, appeared March 1, 1842, in the same periodical. Introductory material to the Book of Mormon, as well as publicity about it, told of Joseph Smith's obtaining the gold plates and of angelic visitations, but nothing was printed that remotely suggested earlier visitations."

"In 1833 the Church published the Book of Commandments, forerunner to the present Doctrine and Covenants, and again no reference was made to Joseph's first vision, although several references were made to the Book of Mormon and the circumstances of its origin."

"The first regular periodical to be published by the Church was The Evening and Morning Star, but its pages reveal no effort to tell the story of the first vision to its readers. Nor do the pages of the Latter-day Saints Messenger and Advocate, printed in Kirtland, Ohio, from October, 1834, to September, 1836. In this newspaper Oliver Cowdery, who was second only to Joseph Smith in the early organization of the Church, published a series of letters dealing with the origin of the Church. These letters were written with the approval of Joseph Smith, but they contained no mention of any vision prior to those connected with the Book of Mormon."

"In 1835 the Doctrine and Covenants was printed at Kirtland, Ohio, and its preface declared that it contained "the leading items of religion which we have professed to believe." Included in the book were the "Lectures on Faith," a series of seven lectures which had been prepared for the School of the Prophets in Kirtland in 1834-35. It is interesting to note that, in demonstrating the doctrine that the Godhead consists of two separate personages, no mention was made of Joseph Smith having seen them, nor was any reference made to the first vision in any part of the publication."

"The first important missionary pamphlet of the Church was the Voice of Warning, published in 1837 by Parley P. Pratt. The book contains long sections on items important to missionaries of the 1830's, such as fulfillment of prophecy, the Book of Mormon, external evidence of the book's authenticity, the resurrection, and the nature of revelation, but nothing, again, on the first vision."

"The Times and Seasons began publication in 1839, but, as indicated above, the story of the vision was not told in its pages until 1842. From all this it would appear that the general church membership did not receive information about the first vision until the 1840's and that the story certainly did not hold the prominent place in Mormon thought that it does today." - Dialogue, Vol.1, No.3, p.31 - p.32

Why did Joseph Smith fail to mention his First Vision when he first wrote the church history in 1835?

Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery wrote and published a history of the church that supposedly covered all of the important points related to its beginnings. However, Joseph Smith records a different story than the "official" one later published in 1842. In Joseph Smith's own 1835 published history of the church, he says that his first spiritual experience was in 1823 after a religious revival in Palmyra that same year. Smith testified that he prayed while in bed to discover if God existed when he was visited by an angelic messenger (Moroni) that forgave him his sins.

Elements of this narrative are similar to the later "official" version except the "official" version has different dates, locations, visitors and purposes for Smith's first spiritual experience. See: http://www.irr.org/mit/first-vision/1...

Some quotes by early church leaders that seem to contradict Joseph's First Vision account:

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." - Apostle Orson Hyde, General Conference Address, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.335

In 1855 The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven, in power and great glory, nor send His messengers panoplied with aught else than the truth of heaven, to communicate to the meek the lowly, the youth of humble origin, the sincere enquirer after the knowledge of God. But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith Jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong; that they were following the precepts of men instead of the Lord Jesus; that He had a work for him to perform, inasmuch as he should prove faithful before Him." (Journal of Discourses 2:170-171) (It is certain Young is speaking of the First Vision for he says the angel told Smith to join no church for they were all wrong. This is the very question the official version of the story states Smith asked of the Father and the Son in the Sacred Grove.)

A few days later Apostle Wilford Woodruff declared: "That same organization and Gospel that Christ died for, and the Apostles spilled their blood to vindicate, is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God,... The angel taught Joseph Smith those principles which are necessary for the salvation of 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,... This man to whom the angel appeared obeyed the Gospel;..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, pp.196-197)

In 1857 Church Apostle Heber C. Kimball, speaking Nov. 8th, 1857, seemed to be oblivious to any vision where Smith saw God and Christ: "Do you suppose that God in person called upon Joseph Smith, our Prophet? God called upon him; but God did not come himself and call, but he sent Peter to do it. Do you not see? He sent Peter and sent Moroni to Joseph, and told him that he had got the plates." (Journal of Discourses, vol.6, p.29)

In 1863 Church Apostle John Taylor explained in a sermon March 1, 1863: "How did this state of things called Mormonism originate? We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p.127) Church Apostle George A. Smith, Nov. 15th, 1863, preached: "When Joseph Smith was about fourteen or fifteen years old,...he went humbly before the Lord and inquired of Him, and the Lord answered his prayer, and revealed to Joseph, by the ministration of angels, the true condition of the religious world. When the holy angel appeared, Joseph inquired which of all these denominations was right and which he should join, and was told they were all wrong,..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.12, pp.333-334)

In 1869 Five years later Apostle Smith again referred to Smith's first vision: "He sought the Lord by day and by night, and was enlightened by the vision of an holy angel. When this personage appeared to him, of his first inquiries was, 'Which of the denominations of Christians in the vicinity was right?' " (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p.77-78 June 20, 1869 )

It seems that in the first 50 years since the first vision was supposed to have happened, that whenever the church leaders referred to the first vision, they were actually referring to the visit of the angel Moroni and not the first vision by God the Father and Jesus.

Fawn M. Brodie was one of the first to cast serious doubt upon the authenticity of Joseph Smith's story of the first vision:

The description of the vision was first published by Orson Pratt in his Remarkable Visions in 1840, twenty years after it was supposed to have occurred. Between 1820 and 1840 Joseph's friends were writing long panegyrics; his enemies were defaming him in an unceasing stream of affidavits and pamphlets, and Joseph himself was dictating several volumes of Bible-flavored prose. But no one in this long period even intimated that he had heard the story of the two gods. At least, no such intimation has survived in print or manuscript.... The first published Mormon history, begun with Joseph's collaboration in 1834 by Oliver Cowdery, ignored it altogether ... Joseph's own description of the first vision was not published until 1842, twenty-two years after the memorable event....

If something happened that spring morning in 1820, it passed totally unnoticed in Joseph's home town, and apparently did not even fix itself in the minds of members of his own family. The awesome vision he described in later years may have been the elaboration of some half-remembered dream stimulated by the early revival excitement and reinforced by the rich folklore of visions circulating in his neighborhood. Or it may have been sheer invention, created some time after 1834 when the need arose for a magnificent tradition to cancel out the stories of his fortune-telling and money-digging (No Man Knows My History, New York, 1957, pp.24-25).

The Book of Commandments emphasizes that it was the Book of Mormon - not the first vision known to the church today - that constituted Joseph's "call . to his holy work" (24:7-11/D&C 20:6-11). Consistent with this passage are Joseph's 1832 and Oliver Cowdery's 1835 reports that cite an angel, later identified as Moroni, who called Joseph to the work, rather than Jesus in the first vision. An Insider's View of Mormon Origins pp. 239.

Why doesn't the First Vision play an important role in Mormon history until the 1860s? No one seems to really mention it before then even though it is now deemed by Latter-day Saints to be the most important event in almost 2,000 years.

To learn about more problems with the First Vision: http://www.mormonthink.com/firstvisio...

[Anonymous]

Was just pulling out of the drive at my buds place and he got a call that three neighbors were on the way with deer sausage, deer pepperoni and 100lbs of fresh processed elk meat for me. So, waited inside(it is 4 below zero out) and while doing so he pointed me to what I copy and paste here. Read it and see if it makes sense to you. If it is true it is way different from what the Salt Lakers are saying these days.

Well, it's certainly not true that Joseph created the story "some time after 1834 when the need arose for a magnificent tradition to cancel out the stories of his fortune-telling and money-digging." The earliest written account of the vision dates to 1832.

D. Michael Quinn has noted that Joseph's delay in publishing his account of the First Vision "echoes the actions of Protestant ministers of his time who waited decades to describe their personal visions of deity. Joseph Smith's first vision became a missionary tool for his followers only after Americans grew to regard converse with God as unusual" (D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1994], 3).

As Richard Bushman has shown, lots of people were claiming visions of deity at the time. At least thirty-two pamphlets relating visionary experiences were published in the United States between 1783 and 1815. Bushman suggests that Joseph's reticence to publish his visions was an attempt to distance himself from this visionary subculture.

For twenty years after the [1820] vision occurred, Joseph Smith published nothing about the vision of the Father and the Son to link him to the other visionaries. . . . He was less reticent about the visit of Moroni--a visionary story, albeit one without parallel among the visionary accounts. Still he held back information about Moroni, too. Although Joseph told family and friends about the angel's appearance, the preface to the first edition of the Book of Mormon says nothing about the angel, only that "the plates of which hath been spoken, were found in the township of Manchester, Ontario county, New-York." If he had been playing to the visionary culture, the visit of an angel would have received top billing. . . .

By the same token, descriptions of the angelic visitations of John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John were not included in the 1833 Book of Commandments. The 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants made references to the angelic visitations that were only slightly more descriptive than the mention of the First Vision in section 20. The current section 13, which records John the Baptist's words, did not appear in either of the early compilations; Joseph apparently said little about John the Baptist's bestowal of the Aaronic Priesthood until Oliver Cowdery gave an account of it in an 1834 letter published in the Messenger and Advocate. . . . Joseph never gave a detailed written description of the visit of Peter, James, and John; he simply mentioned that it happened (D&C 27:12; 128:20). . . .

Joseph himself never made reference to other visionaries, and we cannot tell for sure if he consciously distanced himself; but when compiling revelations for publication in these early years, he did omit almost every account that might connect him to the visionaries of his time.

-- Richard Lyman Bushman, "The Visionary World of Joseph Smith," BYU Studies 37, no. 1 (1997-98): 194-96.

[_maklelan]

Was just pulling out of the drive at my buds place and he got a call that three neighbors were on the way with deer sausage, deer pepperoni and 100lbs of fresh processed elk meat for me. So, waited inside(it is 4 below zero out) and while doing so he pointed me to what I copy and paste here. Read it and see if it makes sense to you. If it is true it is way different from what the Salt Lakers are saying these days.

The first indication, in my mind, that this may be a little less than a rock-solid piece of scholarship is this:

Original Author Of Article: SpongeBob SquareGarments

Some of the supporting points are legitimate, but the dating it gives is way off, and when the First Vision was originally published doesn't really give us any information on whether or not it happened. The Joseph Smith History, after all, explains that he published the account to correct the spurious versions that were circulated. Luke's gospel has much the same motivation, which is separated by far more time from the events which it chronicles.

[_Inconceivable]

Thanks for the post, Squackeye,

Bushman suggests that Joseph's reticence to publish his visions was an attempt to distance himself from this visionary subculture.

I would suggest that after a lifetime of research, Bushman can only guess why there is no evidence of the "visitation of Diety" to his hero previous to the 1840's.

There is no evidence.

None.

Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation.

(Pearl of Great Price | JS-History 1:20 - 25)

This is the word of a man, who, at the time was lying to his wife about at least one extramarital affair.

[_Nevo]

Thanks for the post, Squackeye,

Bushman suggests that Joseph's reticence to publish his visions was an attempt to distance himself from this visionary subculture.

I would suggest that after a lifetime of research, Bushman can only guess why there is no evidence of the "visitation of Diety" to his hero previous to the 1840's.

There is no evidence.

None.

There is plenty of evidence for the First Vision prior to the 1840s--notably, Joseph Smith's handwritten account in 1832.

This is the word of a man, who, at the time was lying to his wife about at least one extramarital affair.

What extramarital affair(s) was Joseph lying to his wife about in 1838?

[_harmony]

There is plenty of evidence for the First Vision prior to the 1840s--notably, Joseph Smith's handwritten account in 1832.

That is not evidence. All too often, Joseph has no witnesses.

This is the word of a man, who, at the time was lying to his wife about at least one extramarital affair.

What extramarital affair(s) was Joseph lying to his wife about in 1838?

Fanny. 1831.

[_maklelan]

That is not evidence. All too often, Joseph has no witnesses.

I think his 1832 handwritten account is evidence enough the story was in circulation well before 1840.

[_harmony]

That is not evidence. All too often, Joseph has no witnesses.

I think his 1832 handwritten account is evidence enough the story was in circulation well before 1840.

Is that what you were trying to prove? If so, then yes, obviously the story was in circulation. However, that is not evidence of it's truthfulness. For that, Joseph needs witnesses... and he doesn't have them.

[_maklelan]

Is that what you were trying to prove? If so, then yes, obviously the story was in circulation.

That's all he was saying.

[_malkie]

That is not evidence. All too often, Joseph has no witnesses.

I think his 1832 handwritten account is evidence enough the story was in circulation well before 1840.

Harmony replied:

Is that what you were trying to prove? If so, then yes, obviously the story was in circulation. However, that is not evidence of it's truthfulness. For that, Joseph needs witnesses... and he doesn't have them.

Not wishing to disagree with Harmony, but the mere existence of a 1832 handwritten account is not evidence enough the story was in circulation well before 1840.

If the story was in circulation, then would church leaders not know about it, and would that not suggest that the leaders who gave a different story (as described in the OP) were not being truthful?

Furthermore, did Joseph not say that shortly after the first vision he was persecuted by the ministers in the area for saying that he had had the vision?

21 Some few days after I had this vision, I happened to be in company with one of the Methodist preachers, who was very active in the before mentioned religious excitement; and, conversing with him on the subject of religion, I took occasion to give him an account of the vision which I had had. I was greatly surprised at his behavior; he treated my communication not only lightly, but with great contempt, saying it was all of the devil, that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days; that all such things had ceased with the apostles, and that there would never be any more of them.
22 I soon found, however, that my telling the story had excited a great deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was the cause of great persecution, which continued to increase; and though I was an obscure boy, only between fourteen and fifteen years of age, and my circumstances in life such as to make a boy of no consequence in the world, yet men of high standing would take notice sufficient to excite the public mind against me, and create a bitter persecution; and this was common among all the sects—all united to persecute me.

If the story was in circulation, and he had the experience in JSH v21-22, would that not say that Joseph did not delay in publishing his account of the First Vision? And why would D. Michael Quinn need to excuse Joseph's delay?

Maybe I'm just not putting these pieces together properly.