Sandra Tanner, John Dehlin, grindael Podcast

[_grindael]

Of course, Joseph was teaching then that the Son (Jesus) had a body, but the Father did not, that Jesus was the Father incarnate. One trinitarian God.

[_Shulem]

Of course, Joseph was teaching then that the Son (Jesus) had a body, but the Father did not, that Jesus was the Father incarnate. One trinitarian God.

Joseph Fielding Smith must have known this and rather than bring the matter to public discussion he chose to hide it up and lock it away. This is the mentally of Church Presidents. Hide it up -- question not -- pray, pay, and obey.

The Book of Mormon teaches the trinitarian God in every sense. The idea of the Father being a separate Being with a body of flesh and bone was a doctrine that Smith later made up. Book of Mormon prophets must be rolling in their graves considering what Smith did to their God.

[_Craig Paxton]

Where is rosebud?

[_oliblish]

What you don't know won't hurt you.

[_Craig Paxton]

JOSEPH SMITH’S FIRST VISION, AND HOW THE CHURCH AND ITS APOLOGISTS MISLEAD...

https://www.mormonstories.org/podcast/j ... st-vision/

I'm the old guy...

The Video (live) is here on the Mormon Stories Facebook Page...

https://www.Facebook.com/groups/Mormons ... %20MISLEAD

I'm only partially through this podcast but thought that each of you did a great job of exposing Peterson’s gas lighting. In my opinion, Peterson's DesNews article was reprehensible and full of lies, Jedi mind tricks, packed with obfuscation and finger pointing and frankly felt very culty. He’s an embarrassment to Mormonism and while I’m certain that he is not, he should be ashamed of himself.
I also thought that Consigliore did a great job of skewering Peterson in his podcast on this same subject.

PS: Anyone interested in reading more information regarding Smith evolving views on deity which coincidentally correspond with his evolving First Visions myth stories might enjoy reading this. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4XVnsg ... edit?pli=1

[_Meadowchik]

I'd love to read the German if you have a link to it.

Ask and ye shall receive...

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper- ... -extract/3

Thank you!

So what are we looking at with known second-hand accounts of apostles in the 30s and 40s? Are there many more like this?

Also was it normal to call it a person's fifteenth year after their fourteenth birthday?

[_Shulem]

In the spring of 1820 the Supreme Rulers of the universe rent the veil of darkness which for long ages had shrouded the earth. Choosing the time and the place and the person, they came down from their celestial home to a grove of trees near Palmyra, New York. Calling young Joseph by name, they then told him that pure and perfect religion was no longer found among men and that he would be the instrument in their hands of restoring the fulness of their everlasting gospel.

Where in the 1832 account does Smith claim the Supreme RULERS came down and appeared to the boy prophet? There is absolutely no mention or telling of this idea in the first account which was the one that was most fresh in Smith's mind.

So tell me, McConkie, you apostolic liar, where was the Father? Was he hiding behind a tree?

[_Shulem]

Inevitably (and properly) the “true church” doctrine emerges very early in any serious discussion of the gospel, for there is no better place to start such a discussion than with the First Vision. And there, in that very first conversation with man in this dispensation, the Lord presented it in unmistakable clarity.

The First Account of the First Vision was given in 1832. The conversation that took place was between Smith and Jesus. The Father wasn't there. The Father wasn't even mentioned other than in Jesus's promise that he would come back someday in his Father's glory to take vengeance.

How do you account for that, Packer? When Smith wrote this TESTIMONY in 1832 it was fresh on his mind. But we see that Heavenly Father with a body of flesh and bones wasn't on his mind AT ALL.

[_Shulem]

The great God with the Lord Jesus at his right hand came down from heaven; stood personally in a grove of trees in western New York; called young Joseph by name; commanded him to join none of the churches of the day

You do realize, Mr. McConkie, that you could not have made such a claim until after Smith amended his testimony in 1838. Based on the ORIGINAL and FIRST testimony there is no mention of a Father coming down and swinging about the trees with Jesus. Smith said nothing about a Father coming down. Smith said nothing about TWO PERSONAGES. He made that up years later.

[_Shulem]

It is well-known that the truth or falsity of a story lies mainly in the details. There are some details connected with the vision given to Joseph Smith the Prophet that may appear to many as insignificant and by many members of the Church are overlooked, yet they are of vital and of overwhelming importance.

How about the details of the FIRST ACCOUNT (1832) of the First Vision? What do those DETAILS reveal, sir? Would you mind getting up at the pulpit in General Conference and telling the saints about the 1832 testimony of the First Vision?

Without any question to the contrary, it must be assumed that Joseph Smith, when he went to pray, had an idea that somewhere the divine truth was to be found.

Really? But didn't Joseph write: "they had apostatised from the true and liveing faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ"?

Tell us about the 1832 account you locked up all these years.

If he had cunningly thought out a plan, he surely would not have dared to face the religious world with such a story as that he had received a visitation from both the Father and the Son. From all the teachings he had received, that was evidently the furthest thought from his mind. It was too revolutionary and conflicted universally with all of the religious creeds—Catholic and Protestant—in the world. He might have said that the Son of God had appeared to him, but this is something very remote, considering the universal belief.

His 1832 testimony says nothing about having a vision of both the Father and the Son. Just Jesus. It was the furthest thing from Smith's mind. Not until later did Smith concoct that idea and told a new tale in 1838. Of course, Mr. Smith, you know about this, don't you?

You, Joseph Fielding Smith, walk in crooked paths and deceive your people just like Joe did. You're cut from the same Smith cloth.