Revision as of 21:20, 8 April 2014 (view source) RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→‎Criticisms of events occurring after the First Vision: m) ← Older edit		Revision as of 21:22, 8 April 2014 (view source) RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→‎Criticisms of the First Vision: m) Newer edit →
Line 104:		Line 104:
	}}		}}
−	==Criticisms of the First Vision==	+	{{:Joseph Smith's First Vision/Criticisms of the First Vision}}
−	{{SummaryItem
−	|link=Joseph Smith's First Vision/Paul's accounts
−	|subject=Discrepancies in Paul's account of his vision
−	|summary=Paul the apostle gave more than one account of his vision of the resurrected Lord while on the road to Damascus. Like Joseph Smith's account of the First Vision, Paul's accounts differ in some details but agree in the overall message.
−	}}
−	{{SummaryItem
−	|link=Joseph Smith's First_Vision/Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts
−	|subject=Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts?
−	|summary=The Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts, while refusing to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision.
−	}}
−	{{SummaryItem
−	|link=Joseph Smith's First Vision/Doctrine and Covenants 84 says God not seen without priesthood
−	|subject=D&C:84 says God cannot be seen without priesthood
−	|summary=Critics argue that Joseph Smith claimed that he saw God in 1820 and also claimed that he received the priesthood in 1829. But in a text which he produced in 1832 ({{S||DC|84|21-22}}) it is said that a person cannot see God without holding the priesthood. Therefore, it is claimed that Joseph Smith contradicted himself and this counts as evidence against his calling as an authentic prophet of God.
−	}}
−	{{SummaryItem
−	|link=Joseph Smith's First Vision/Were all the churches of the day claimed to be "an abomination"
−	|subject=Was Joseph Smith told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination?"
−	|summary=It is claimed that Joseph Smith stated that during the First Vision that he was told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination."
−	}}
−
	{{:Joseph Smith's First Vision/Criticisms of events occurring after the First Vision}}		{{:Joseph Smith's First Vision/Criticisms of events occurring after the First Vision}}
	{{:Joseph Smith's First Vision/Doctrinal criticisms related to the First Vision}}		{{:Joseph Smith's First Vision/Doctrinal criticisms related to the First Vision}}

---

Revision as of 21:22, 8 April 2014

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Joseph Smith's First Vision

Template:FirstVisionPortal

God touched his eyes with his finger and said “[Joseph] this is my beloved Son hear him.” As soon as the Lord had touched his eyes with his finger he immediately saw the Savior. After meeting, a few of us questioned him about the matter and he told us at the bottom of the meeting house steps that he was in the House of Father Smith in Kirtland when Joseph made this declaration, and that Joseph while speaking of it put his finger to his right eye, suiting the action with the words so as to illustrate and at the same time impress the [occurrence] on the minds of those unto whom He was speaking.
Diary of Charles Lowell Walker (Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 1980), 2:755–56 [recorded 2 February 1893]

Questions

Joseph Smith's claim that he saw the Father and the Son in 1820 has produced a wide variety of criticism. This set of articles addresses the various critical claims related to the First Vision. The linked articles below are designed to help readers to see some of the weaknesses that are found in arguments that are made against Joseph Smith's First Vision accounts. Some of these arguments are currently being advocated in anti-Mormon literature that is handed out near the Sacred Grove in Palmyra, New York.

Gospel Topics, located on lds.org., "First Vision Accounts"

Gospel Topics, located on lds.org.

The various accounts of the First Vision tell a consistent story, though naturally they differ in emphasis and detail. Historians expect that when an individual retells an experience in multiple settings to different audiences over many years, each account will emphasize various aspects of the experience and contain unique details. Indeed, differences similar to those in the First Vision accounts exist in the multiple scriptural accounts of Paul’s vision on the road to Damascus and the Apostles’ experience on the Mount of Transfiguration.3 Yet despite the differences, a basic consistency remains across all the accounts of the First Vision. Some have mistakenly argued that any variation in the retelling of the story is evidence of fabrication. To the contrary, the rich historical record enables us to learn more about this remarkable event than we could if it were less well documented.

Click here to view the complete article

Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Seminary Teacher Manual, "LESSON 6: Joseph Smith—History 1:1–20"

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,  Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Seminary Teacher Manual, (2013)

Just as Joseph Smith emphasized different aspects of his vision in his multiple accounts, the Apostle Paul emphasized different aspects of his vision of the Savior to different audiences (see Acts 9:1–9; Acts 22:5–11; Acts 26:12–20). Why do you think Joseph Smith and Paul emphasized different things each time they related the accounts of their visions?

Click here to view the complete article

Topics

Primary sources

1. REDIRECT Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision

Wikipedia treatment of Joseph Smith's First Vision

A FairMormon Analysis of Wikipedia article "First Vision"

Summary: FairMormon analyzes the Wikipedia treatment of the First Vision.

Did the Church hide accounts of the First Vision?

The claim is sometimes made by critics that the LDS Church hides the various accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision that are not in its official canon. The following chronological database (compiled by FAIR volunteer Edward Jones) demonstrates conclusively that this is simply not the case. The various accounts of the First Vision have been widely acknowledged in LDS-authored sources throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

LDS-Authored Publications (1910-1968)

Summary: Mentions of the various accounts of the First Vision in LDS publications (1910-1968)

LDS-Authored Publications (1969-1978)

Summary: Mentions of the various accounts of the First Vision in LDS publications (1969-1978)

LDS-Authored Publications (1979-1983)

Summary: Mentions of the various accounts of the First Vision in LDS publications (1979-1983)

LDS-Authored Publications (1984-1989)

Summary: Mentions of the various accounts of the First Vision in LDS publications (1984-1989)

LDS-Authored Publications (1990-1997)

Summary: Mentions of the various accounts of the First Vision in LDS publications (1990-1997)

LDS-Authored Publications (1998-2003)

Summary: Mentions of the various accounts of the First Vision in LDS publications (1998-2003)

Criticisms of events leading up to the First Vision

Methodist camp meetings in the Palmyra area

Summary: It is claimed that any association Joseph had with Methodism did not occur until the 1824-25 revival in Palmyra, and that his claim that the "unusual excitement" started with the Methodists in 1820 is therefore incorrect.

Joseph became "partial to the Methodist sect" in 1820

Summary: It is claimed that Joseph didn't become "partial to the Methodist sect" until at least 1823, after Alvin's death, or as late as 1838, rather than in 1820 as he claimed in his 1838 First Vision account.

Were there revivals in 1820?

Summary: It is claimed that there were no religious revivals in the Palmyra, New York area in 1820, contrary to Joseph Smith's claims that during that year there was "an unusual excitement on the subject of religion...indeed, the whole district of country seemed affected by it"

• • Gordon B. Hinckley cited false information?—
    Brief Summary: It is claimed that there were no religious revivals in the Palmyra, New York area in 1820, and that Gordon B. Hinckley cited false information in a book called Truth Restored. (Click here for full article)
    ∗       ∗       ∗

Smith family place of residence in 1820

Summary: It is claimed that there are discrepancies in Joseph's account of his family's early history, which make his 1820 and subsequent revelations impossible, and that there is no evidence that the Smith family was in the Palmyra area in 1820 for the religious excitement and First Vision which Joseph reported.

Multiple accounts of the First Vision

Summary: Historians have published and discussed the various accounts of Joseph Smith's first vision for decades.

First video published by the Church History Department.

Jump to Subtopic:

• Joseph Smith's various accounts of the First Vision
• Joseph Smith's 1832 account of the First Vision
• Joseph Smith's 1835 accounts of the First Vision
• Joseph Smith's 1838 account of the First Vision
• Joseph Smith's first and second visitation of angels
• Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account states he was 15 years old
• Discrepancies in Paul's account of his vision

1. REDIRECT Events after the First Vision
2. REDIRECT The First Vision and doctrine

== Notes ==

1. [note]  Richard L. Anderson, "Parallel Prophets: Paul and Joseph Smith," Ensign (April 1985): 12.off-site