Joseph Smith's First Vision

Summary

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.

Events leading up to the First Vision

Religious excitement in the Palmyra area

What constituted the "unusual excitement" that ultimately resulted in Joseph's vision?

Critics claim 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.

Was Joseph Smith mistaken about religious revivals in his area in 1820?

Critics claim 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"

Location of the Smith family in 1820

Was the Smith family in the proper area at the proper time for Joseph's 1820 vision?

Critics claim 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.

The Vision

Variations between different accounts of the First Vision

Joseph Smith gave several accounts of the First Vision. Critics charge that differences in the accounts show that he changed and embellished his story over time, and that he therefore had no such vision.

Comparison of Joseph's First Vision to Paul's vision

Variations in the accounts of Paul's vision

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.

Have Greek scholars solved the discrepancies in the accounts of Paul's vision?

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.

Does D&C 84 say God cannot be seen without the priesthood?

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 (DC 84꞉21-22) it is said that a person cannot see God without holding the priesthood. Therefore, critics claim that Joseph Smith contradicted himself and this counts as evidence against his calling as an authentic prophet of God.

Events occurring after the First Vision

Published references to the vision

Is there no reference to the First Vision in 1830s publications?

Critics claim that there is no reference to the 1838 canonical First Vision story in any published material from the 1830s, and that nothing published in this period mentions that Joseph saw the Father and Son. They also assume that it would have been mentioned in the local newspapers at the time.

When missionaries said that the Prophet had seen "God" personally did they mean Jesus Christ?

Critics have claimed that just because LDS missionaries were teaching around 1 November 1830 that Joseph Smith had previously seen “God” personally it cannot be assumed that this was a reference to God the Father since the Book of Mormon (completed ca. 11 June 1829) refers to Jesus Christ as “the eternal God” (title page; 2 Nephi 26:12). The argument is made that since this evidence indicates that Joseph Smith understood Jesus Christ to be “God” the statement by the missionaries may have simply meant that Joseph Smith had seen the Savior; not necessarily the Father.

Was there no mention of the First Vision in non-LDS literature before 1843?

There is no mention of the First Vision in non-Mormon literature before 1843. If the First Vision story had been known by the public before 1840 (when Orson Pratt published his pamphlet) the anti-Mormons “surely” would have seized upon it as an evidence of Joseph Smith’s imposture.

Is there a lack of contemporary evidence for a Father and Son vision before 1838?

There is no mention of Joseph Smith seeing the Father and Son in any “contemporary” newspaper, diary, LDS publication, or writing of any kind until the year 1838.

Did the LDS Church seldom publicize the First Vision until after 1877?

Critics charge, “Before the death of Brigham Young in 1877 the first vision was seldom mentioned in Mormon publications.” This evidence implies that the general membership of the LDS Church was not familiar with the First Vision story until late in the nineteenth century.

Additional First Vision issues

• What about the "Angels" of the 1835 account? FAIRWiki link
• Controversy Concerning D&C 121:28 FAIRWiki link
• The Father: A Spirit vs. Embodied FAIRWiki link