Review of: John Pontius, Visions of Glory: One Man’s Astonishing Account of the Last Days (Springville UT: Cedar Fort, 2012). 268 pages. ISBN 978 1462111183.
Visions of Glory is written by John Pontius and recounts several visions and spiritual manifestations. Their recipient is an anonymous informant called “Spencer” in the book. It includes an account of visions of the spirit world, a series of vignettes of apocalyptic last-days scenarios, and describes Spencer’s foretold role in preparing the world for the second coming of Christ. It concludes with an appendix containing other visions which may provide parallels or points of comparison to Spencer’s claims.
The Saints should always be seeking for further light and knowledge. Experience has shown, however, that an anxious interest in such light and knowledge can lead to being deceived, misled, and manipulated if we are not sufficiently grounded in true principles relating to revelation and learning. Prior to teaching the endowment, Joseph Smith warned the Saints: “Let us be faithful and silent, brethren, and if God gives you a manifestation, keep it to yourselves.” Of this remark, Elder Dallin H. Oaks wrote:
By and large, Latter-day Saints observe this direction. They do not speak publicly of their most sacred experiences. They seldom mention miracles in bearing their testimonies, and they rarely preach from the pulpit about signs that the gospel is true. They usually affirm their testimony of the truthfulness of the restored gospel by asserting the conclusion, not by giving details on how it was obtained.
The purpose of this review is not to cast doubt on the sincerity of those who have believed these visionary accounts. It is important, however, to take note of several factors:
- Visions of Glory’s portrayal of Jesus Christ and His method of interacting with the Saints is not consistent with scripture.
- Visions of Glory teaches doctrines that contradict LDS scripture and prophets.
- Prophets and apostles have repeatedly taught that it is inappropriate for members to publicize such material without permission from the President of the Church.
- Spencer claims he will receive authority independent of the Church and its leaders.
- Anonymous accounts cannot be verified.
Readers of Visions of Glory may wish to compare LDS teachings and doctrines that differ from the book’s teachings.
Continue reading on the FAIR web site→
I have recently noticed, while surfing around Amazon, that John Pontius has written several books in this genre. Both LDS and non-LDS have been prolific in writing about the visions of heaven in the numerous NDE accounts that are currently sweeping the earth. I have learned a lot about our relationship with God and his eternal plan through these sources and consider them evidence that we are all equal in the sight of God. It is true we need to be cautious about some of the claims, but taken as a whole, the body of evidence is irrefutable. I have not bought any of Pontius’ books, but have bought those of Betty Eadie, Kim Rives and Jeff Olsen and others, which are powerful witnesses to the divine. Rather than contradict the brethren, these stories add a loving dimension to the revelations already received. I believe God is speaking through many people, of all faiths, to lead his children back to Him. The message may a be a little different in each case, since not all are at the same level of spiritual growth.
I certainly don’t question the idea that all are equal before God. Or that God can speak to all people. He clearly can and does:
8 For behold, the Lord doth grant unto all nations, of their own nation and tongue, to teach his word, yea, in wisdom, all that he seeth fit that they should have; therefore we see that the Lord doth counsel in wisdom, according to that which is just and true (Alma 29:8).
And, I am not reviewing Eadie or the rest, so can’t speak to them.
As for this specific case and whether it involves contradicting the Brethren, I’ve set out the evidence behind how they seem to view such matters as it applies to members of the Church.
One also has to deal with the issue in this case of a supposed member of the Church (the source is anonymous, so we cannot know for sure) teaching doctrines that contradict LDS scripture and doctrine.
That seems to me a different matter than recognizing that all religions and peoples have some degree of truth to them.
Readers will simply have to judge for themselves upon weighing the evidence.
Because of a powerful spiritual experience on my mission almost 35 years ago I am highly suspicious of any over intellectualization of spiritual or faith-based things. While I appreciate the time that Greg Smith has put into his review of John Pontius’s book I think he misses the mark and puts a demand upon his writings that are inconsistent with the claims. In the afterwords of the book John even makes several comments about how we, the reader may question whether these things are true or not. He himself personally believes that it is and that the reader must decide for himself whether these things are literal or allegorical in nature. I believe they are both.
For me, this book, “Visions of Glory” has been an enlightening experience to my normally skeptical mind. Frankly, it is one of the scariest books I’ve ever read in my life, and at the same time one of the most beautiful. It has given me a much clearer understanding of some of the sequences of events that lead up to the 2nd coming. It has caused me to be more prepared in my temporal salvation and I am more diligent in acquiring my own years supply of food for my family.
But to put such rigid standards and claims upon this book as “not being authoritative” or “not understanding the proper authority from the church” or “does not understand how the church government is to function” (all quotes are my own wording), is to sap the life out of it. This is a book about visions and dreams that happened 40 years ago. Anyone who has had such dreams or visions knows that it is difficult to put into words some of the things that happen. I personally had a dream 21 years ago of which I am waiting for the fulfillment of it and, as time has passed, I have never been able to guess what the symbols meant until after they occurred. I have given up on trying to understand what the end of my dream means.
Spencer repeatedly says that he is not able to remember or that these things were withheld from his memory and he is frustrated by that sometimes. He also comments that it is the first time he’s ever tried to put these things into words as it is difficult to do. To be so pharisaic and rigid in the interpretation of this book is looking beyond the mark.
I find it fascinating that most of the people that are looking for attention, authority or money go about it in a far different way than Spencer and John have done here. He clearly states that he’s not the prophet of the church and this is not how Revelation is to be given to the church and that is why he has remained anonymous because they are about himself. He also clearly points out that he does not want to be a guru or speaker of these principles and this is the first person I’ve ever seen work this way. Everyone else (who has had such “visions”) wants the attention and wants to speak about these things to gain notoriety and usually income, yet Greg uses that against him. In a world where publicity, book signings, speaking tours, seminars, etc. are used to generate interest in a book and thus make more sales, John and Spencer have made a complete 180° turnaround and done none of these. It is articles like this from Greg Smith that will cause the controversy and make more sales, not the traditional methods used by publishers.
Greg Smith also criticizes many of the ways and methods that are purported to be accomplished or said by Christ in this book, and he also highly criticizes the fact that it is focused on Spencer. Spencer is the one that had the dreams, and everyone in that conference center was also blessed. Spencer is the one writing the book so of course it’s about him. Everyone else in that conference also received their own divine commission and responsibility. But again I point to the fact that Spencer is remaining anonymous and not desiring a position of status among us. In reality his story is our story and each one of us will have similar things to deal with before the 2nd coming. Each one of us who have the priesthood and are part of the house of Israel have a mission to perform. Each one of us will have personal dramatic trials to overcome, difficulties to face and a mission to accomplish. I find Spencer’s story encouraging, uplifting and hopeful in the midst of a world gone completely mad.
Greg Smith criticizes the fact that he focuses on a number of the cataclysmic disasters that are to occur and the economic collapses. What would he rather have Spencer say? Would he rather be like so many of the economists and politicians of our day and say that everything is going to be fine? Would he rather that we ignore the consequences of the fall of the great and spacious building and live our lives as if none of that is ever going to happen? Or would he rather that there be a coupon at the end for 10% off his “survival supplies” available at his online store?
I find it refreshing that somebody is speaking the truth about the events of the last days. As noted in the book, in the Scriptures and other church publications there are terrible things ahead, and I think Spencer and John have done a great job at putting these things into a motivational perspective, encouraging us to be prepared in multitudinous ways. So many monetary prophets of our day encourage us to buy gold, silver, and a host of other things whereby we place all of our faith upon finances. Spencer wisely shows that finances will do nothing in the future. It would be better to spend that money on food, shelter, and other items that can sustain life. It would also be better to prepare more spiritually than we currently are now.
While I appreciate Greg Smith’s desire to make sure that we all maintain the straight and narrow path, I think his pharisaic approach is too narrow and restrictive to a very well done book that can help all of us prepare for the difficulties that lie ahead. I personally loved the description of the pre-mortal world and the wonderful things associated with building the city of Zion. I learned a number of powerful things and for the first time in years have recommended this book to several friends. This is not a book on church government or policy, its a vision of what happens to him and what we are going to have to deal with in the future.
Are we to place it in the same category as something from President Monson or the amazing book “The Infinite Atonement” by Tad Callister? No, but I do think it is worth reading and I am now re-reading it with an even more discriminating eye towards the words than before. I will also take to heart the words that Greg has used and pay attention to them throughout, but I do not think we are being deceived by this book and I look forward to reading it again.
We’ve been told that in the last days young men will see visions and old men will dream dreams. There have been many visions and experiences similar to those described in Visions of Glory—some even recounted in Church publications. Those in the Appendix support that point.
Metaphor or prophecy, I have found great value in it. Perhaps like Scrooge’s experiences, there is only a shadow in some of Spencer’s visions that might be.
Much of what I read in the book brought me a sense of calm expectation rather than a fearful one. It makes an important point about how very little material wealth is worth, and that at the end of our own journeys all we will really end up with are the lessons we have learned that helped us become what we will be.
It also touches the deeper desires of my heart to become better than I am now. I’m glad to have it, and consider it to be of great worth to me. Spencer is a friend, whoever he is. He is not just any anonymous source; he is a sensitive and generous, thoughtful man who has shared experiences which have enlarged my faith and determination. I believe this without knowing his true identity.
But he is not the Prophet. I follow the Prophet. My personal progress comes through answers to prayer and obedience in keeping my covenants, plus all the blessings and benefits derived from actively participating in the programs offered by ordained servants of God.
And an image stays in my heart and mind: the vision of someday qualifying to have the Lord embrace me with all the light and love of eternity. This scene has come to me from several sources, the two most vivid being in the Temple and from Spencer.
Brother Smith’s experience with this wonderful book appears to be the polar opposite of mine.
I am eternally grateful for the courage it took for Spencer to share and John to write such a beautiful personal account for the benefit of those us who value such this magnificent work. Certainly those with ears to hear will value it. To others, such as Brother Smith, it could even appear dangerous. I cannot fathom how such could ever be the case, but his review is evidence that there are some within the Church who do not value this sublime and precious account. To me it was beautiful, insightful, magnificent beyond words.
In short, I believe Brother Smith’s review was patently unFair.
1. The book’s portrayal of Christ and His dealings with us are entirely consistent with scripture.
2. The book does not in fact teach doctrine as the reviewer claims. It gives a highly personal and sensitive account of a very remarkable brother. This was his experience. To the contrary, the book explicitly states that it does not purport to proclaim doctrine. The reviewer appears to not have read the book very carefully.
Further, all of the information is consistent with LDS scripture and the statements of the Brethren. (As a matter of semantics, Brother Smith stated that it teaches doctrine that contradicts prophets. I believe what he meant to say was that it purportedly contradicts what prophets have taught rather than contracting humans per se.) Semantics aside, I have found the experiences in the book to be 100% consistent which scripture and prophetic counsel and teachings.
3. The reviewer’s statement purporting, most ironically, to speak for the Brethren, clearly misstates the position of the Church.
4. A careful reading of the book would reveal that Spencer is absolutely not claiming any authority outside of the latter-day Church. This is a most unfortunate and unfounded claim of the reviewer.
5. Anonymous accounts are by there very nature unverifiable. This is the only accurate statement I could find of the reviewer. This obvious statement of fact also happens to be 100% irrelevant.
My conclusion is that the reviewer did not read the book very carefully. I marvel that such people somehow feel threatened by the sincere and humble sharing of sacred experiences by fellow Church members.
Despite that personal mystery of mine, my advice to any who care to read the book is this: Read it with the Spirit and by and through the Spirit. The Spirit will manifest all truth to you. If the Spirit witnesses the truth of the account to you, rejoice in that knowledge. If not, then let it be.
What comes to my mind is the sage advise of Gamliel as recorded in Acts 5:38-39, “And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to naught: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.”
What we need in these latter days is to let the Spirit be our guide. It is my cherished personal experience to have have felt the Spirit in rich abundance as I’ve read this beautiful book. This is my experience. I sincerely hope that others have felt and will feel the same as they read and reread this most remarkable book.
God bless John Pontius and brother Spencer.
Rob
I recently read Greg Smith’s review. It seems that people sometimes have a tendency to look for revelation directed to and for the benefit of the Lord’s people from those who are not in fact responsible for the Lord’s people. Interpreter, presciently enough, recently had a roundtable that discussed the Hiram Page incident. I think more people should have watched or listened. For the benefit of those who have not yet done so, here is a link:
http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/scripture-roundtable-28-dc-gospel-doctrine-lesson-24-be-not-deceived-but-continue-in-steadfastness/
Those called to receive revelation for the church are sustained and acknowledge by the church.
The commenters we have heard from so far who love Visions of Glory and dislike Greg Smith’s review fail to understand and respond to Greg’s points; they simply state how much they enjoyed and appreciated the book and tell us Greg is wrong (but not why he’s wrong).
Allow me to quote Greg’s summary of the problem with Pontius’ book:
The issue isn’t whether or not Visions of Glory is a nice book. It isn’t that people can’t have visions. It is that the book makes claims that are contrary to the teachings of the gospel and it usurps the authority of the brethren.
The experience of Hiram Page is canonized in the Doctrine and Covenants for a specific reason, and Visions of Glory is a case study of that very reason.
I appreciate Dr. Smith’s sincere and well-reasoned response to a book that could be quite troubling to many thoughtful Latter-day Saints. While ostensibly a book written to engender faith and spiritual preparedness for trying times to come, this book and many others in the same genre, undermine the order of the Church and callings of those who preside over it – those who are genuine prophets, seers and revelators. I do feel some empathy with Brother Pontius, who seems sincere in his desire to warn the Saints; but he steps “over the line” in that regard. It is not a simple narrative of a personal experience, but a pronouncement of purported fact. Neither he, nor “Spencer” have been called and set apart to receive revelation for the Church.
This is not the first time a good and faithful member of the Church has stepped out of bounds in this regard. We are all challenged and tempted in different ways. I try to stick with the Brethren.
I think the book has value as wholesome entertainment – one possible description of the pre-millennial events. My concern is for those Church members who seem to regard this book as scripture. Despite the spiritual confirmation of its veracity claimed by some, it is not scripture, and certainly not binding on the church.
Smith’s critics would be well-advised to re-consider his review of Pontius’s book as the sincere and concerned voice of warning it is.
Either The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Kingdom of God or it is not. If it is what it emphatically claims to be, then Pontius’s book is troubling. The “visions” recorded there are either false to some extent or should never have been shared.
No matter which, Smith was right to point out that the messages being delivered are 1) contrary to revealed truth, 2) contrary to the messages of our prophets and apostles, and 3) being delivered in a way contrary to the revealed mechanism.
Spencer, whoever he may be, should have kept his experiences to himself and intimate friends who would have respected their entirely personal nature. Given that someone shared these claims with Pontius, Pontius should have recognized their sacred or dubious nature and not turned them into a commercial venture in a way that might influence a reader to think that such reports might have relevance to anyone but Spencer himself.
Smith is entirely correct in his review, and Pontiphiles should not take offense when someone points out the real problems and even dangers with a book they happened to enjoy.
Joseph Fielding Smith:
Harold B. Lee:
John A. Widtsoe:
This is an interesting discussion. It seems to me that we have 3 different types of people here:
1-Those who have read the book and feel that is has value and is not inconsistent with church teachings nor does it lead others astray from church authority or doctrine (I would fit in that category even though I do agree that there are books like this that do not follow this rule and can be dangerous, such as the one by Betty Eady. In my opinion, “Visions of Glory” just isn’t one of those that will lead people astray.)
2-Greg Smith, who claims to have read the book but also claims that there are things in it that are inconsistent with church teachings and says that this is nothing more than a modern day Hiram Page incident that is leading others away from the truth. He also makes claims that are not in the book and therefore we who have read it must answer those claims.
3-Those who have not read the book and then demand that those are in the first category answer the claims made by Mr. Smith in the second category.
This sounds just like the many times I have defended the Book of Mormon to people who have not read it but have only read details from others who claimed to have read it and then written about what they saw in it but weren’t true and making false claims about in the process. Make no mistake, the book “Visions of Glory” is not comparable to the Book of Mormon, but is 2 peoples version of what happened to “Spencer”.
Mike Parker then says that we who are “Pontiphiles” (to borrow Paul McNabb’s phrase) are supposed to answer these claims by Greg Smith:
1. Visions of Glory’s portrayal of Jesus Christ and His method of interacting with the Saints is not consistent with scripture.
2. Visions of Glory teaches doctrines that contradict LDS scripture and prophets.
3. Prophets and apostles have repeatedly taught that it is inappropriate for members to publicize such material without permission from the President of the Church.
4. Spencer claims he will receive authority independent of the Church and its leaders.
5. Anonymous accounts cannot be verified.
Ok, here is what I see, but I will answer them out of order for one important reason:
Claim #4 is about Spencer claiming to someday receive authority independent of church leaders. This is the probably the one I have the biggest problem with because I don’t see Spencer ever making such a claim in the book. Greg claims he said it, but I can’t find it and I am asking Greg to show where this is located. Why would Greg make such a claim unless the other claims are on soft ground and he wants to nail “Spencer” on something any student of the Gospel can hold onto? This is really a “straw man” in his claims and I just want to see where Spencer says this.
Claim #1 that this is inconsistent with scripture: Do you mean to tell me that every appearance of Angels and Christ is to follow within a narrow definition of a certain way it is supposed to happen? I have met over 30 people in my life that have had NDE’s and none of them have followed the few examples of Godly or Angelic visitations that we have in scripture word-for-word in exact detail, but they all had personal experiences that were personal to them. When Christ visited Joseph Smith, the leaders of his day rejected it because they had not had the same experience. This sounds eerily similar to them. I do not see how it is inconsistent with the scriptural accounts of visits by angelic beings.
Claim #2 about contradicting LDS Scripture: I have read the entire account as given by Greg on the Fairlds.org page and even re-read it again after these comments above. In my opinion just about every one of them are taking a profoundly narrow approach to every subject and as I mentioned earlier is rather “pharisaic” in his view. I just don’t have time to answer all of them here but the tone of all of them is rather “elitist” too and it seems like something right out of the attitude of those making claims against Christ in the New Testament. I don’t mean to be demeaning or derogatory here, its just too narrow an approach. Over-intellectualization is just a damaging as blind faith and subjects of faith must not be viewed in such a manner. My brother who is also in the Medical profession, has left the church because of falling victim to over-intellectualization and supposedly finding inconsistencies in “historical facts” of church history. He is not the first to have done so and will not be the last. This analysis by Greg is somewhat similar in approach to his narrow definition of how things are supposed to be, according to him.
Claim #3 on needing to have permission from the Prophet before discussing or publishing spiritual things: Are we supposed to believe that EVERY spiritual experience needs to be approved in this manner before publication? That would wipe out a lot of books in the Deseret Bookstore and take a tremendous amount of time for the Prophet to now become everybody’s “editor in chief.” Numbers 11:29 reads, “And Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake? Would God that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them!” While I agree that things need to be done in order, this rule would eliminate much of what has been taught; it would remove many of the talks given in general conference and would destroy the spiritual outflow in just about every Sunday school class every weekend.
Claim #5 about anonymous accounts being unverifiable. While this is certainly true, he missed the whole reason for the anonymity of the writer in not wanting to take credit or being above the leadership. No other book writer I know of has followed this path because they all want credit, money, fame, recognition, etc. and it requires that there be book signings, TV interviews, seminars, speeches, radio ads, etc. to generate interest to make more sales, and those methods are all extremely non-anonymous. This is the first book I know of that has followed this very different and proven path to success.
Listen, I am both a profoundly skeptical and solidly believing and faithful person at the same time and my wife will attest to working too hard to “get to the bottom of it and get to the truth”. She will testify that I sometimes go overboard in my desire to learn every little detail to the point of offending others and questioning their answers or motives. My apologies if that has happened here. I am just urging people to read the book for themselves and make their own decision. This is actually the first book outside of the scriptures that I have ever re-read since “Jesus the Christ” over 30 years ago. While I do see value in the book and do not feel it leads away from the teachings of the church or the proper authority, everything must be weighed against that which is true, the scriptures and the current Prophet. I see that Greg Smith has tried to do that in his long and detailed analysis of this book, but my opinion is that his view is too pharisaic and narrow and profoundly critical in a way that is incorrect and destroys its message.
I am not saying that everything should be taken in this book hook, line and sinker but in the context of what it claims to be, a book about dreams or visions he had many years ago, viewed from his perspective, about his life and his mission. This is not a book on doctrine, authority or church government. For those who have not read it, go borrow it from someone who has and make up your own mind. Yes, there are some unusual things in it, but I have learned a lot and have gained much from reading it. It has been a positive life-changing experience that was definitely worth the time to read it (and re-read it).
I appreciate that someone (kellysmith007) has actually addressed some of the substance of my review, instead of the previous assault on my character or personality defects.
I think most of his questions are answered in the review itself. I will clarify here or point to the review for the key points, in the interests of space. If I miss something you think important, please point it out.
I do not “claim” to have read the book, I have read it. I don’t review works without reading them. I would think the many citations to it demonstrate that I have read it, and read it closely.
I have not said that. I have said that Hiram Page is a good example of the type of problem we see here. That said, Hiram Page did not try to spread his opinions and purported revelations anonymously—so, he could be easily corrected by his file leader if necessary. Spencer has avoided that. And, Hiram’s were not published in written form. And, they were not sold for profit, as a book is.
I’ve pointed out precisely where he does this. Briefly, to review a few examples
* Spencer claims he will be ordained by Christ Himself to translate people, ordain them to the 144,00. That’s an authority given by Christ, independent of the apostles (155).
* Those called to be part of the 144,000 are specifically said by Spencer not to be part of “a calling from the Church because it involved no presidency or stewardship.” So, being 144,000 isn’t under the administrative control of the prophets and apostles—as we’ve seen, even the ordination is claimed to come from Christ Himself to Spencer, not via the apostles (175).
* Spencer claims he has an office in the temple, next door to Christ Himself, who most often gives him his assignments, not the apostles (167).
* He claims to know who the apostles and president of the Church will be at the Second Coming of Christ. He knows which of them will die. Thus he is vouchsafed information by his visions that is the prerogative of the President of the Church.
There are other examples in the review, but those suffice to demonstrate the point.
See above. I went through all this in the review. Are you sure that you have read it carefully?
I made such a claim because it is true, and amply demonstrated in the book. When I review books, I point out the contents I find interesting and/or problematic.
No, I didn’t say that. I said there are things that make some of Spencer’s account dubious. You yourself admit this when you tell us that:
But, leaving it like that just doesn’t fly. These are claimed to be revelations. Either they are true, or they aren’t. If they are revelations containing false information, why ought we to trust any of it?
Thus, as I say in the review, all we can do is compare the accounts of Christ’s coming to the scripture we have, and see how they match up. (We cannot presume they are true—we must test and study them. It would be circular reasoning to presume their truth. So, we must compare them with that which we do know to be true—the scriptures.) I see a number of things that don’t match, and that even contradict how such events occur in scripture. This is added reason for caution.
You are welcome to your opinion, but you have made an assertion, not an argument.
Well, in fact, you have not taken the time to answer any of them here. You’re just making assertions.
So, you don’t mean to be demeaning or derogatory, but:
* I’m like the Pharisees
* I’m like those who were anti-Christ in the New Testament
* I’m elitist
* I’m “over-intellectualizing” things, like your apostate brother.
Are you sure you know what “demeaning” or “derogatory” mean? 🙂
Because, it would be hard to think of more demeaning or derogatory things to say to someone, especially just because they disagree with you about some purported revelations by an anonymous author.
You’re entitled to think my reading too narrow. But, you haven’t demonstrated why that is the case. Maybe I think your reading is too broad. Fine—you are welcome to write your own review.
Again, you misstate me. I am not saying someone needs permission to write about spiritual things. What I am saying is merely what the prophets and apostles have said over and over and over again. If you are teaching spiritual experiences that teach new things or things not in your stewardship or matters about the fate of the Church and kingdom, you are to keep them to yourself. Spencer has not done so.
I’ll include just one quotation from the many I’ve provided:
Spencer does all this:
* He’s talking about destiny of the people,
* he’s talking about future things that will happen, have been, and will,
* he’s teaching things not yet revealed to the people (e.g., how the 144,000 will be chosen, and who will choose them)
* Yet, he’s chosen to publish them far and wide.
Well, according to Elder Widtsoe, those wishing to circulate such things are to present them to their bishop. Who is Spencer’s bishop? We can’t know, because Spencer (if he exists) is anonymous.
Exactly. And, Spencer has ignored that order.
No, it wouldn’t. I’ve never heard anyone in general conference claim that they were going to be given authority to ordain the 144,000, or personally discover lost scripture by people hiding in the arctic, or have offices in the temple next door to Jesus to use time-traveling portals. Have you?
Nonsense.
And yet, he still spreads his message. And still talks to people on line (or someone who claims to be him does). Some people aren’t interested in money, they’re interested in having an audience, having power, being thought impressive, being praised for writing such a life-changing book. Priestcraft can, sadly, come for those seeking praise/power rather than money (2 Nephi 26:29). And, you’ll notice that Spencer has gotten all that, from you at least.
Anonymity also avoids him taking responsibility for what he writes. Kind of hard for a bishop to sit him down and tell him to stop it if we don’t know who he is, isn’t it? It could be a way of avoiding the government and counsel of Church authorities. How do we know it isn’t? Well, we can’t tell–because we don’t know who he is, and we can’t see into his heart and mind. So, we must simply judge whether to trust him on other criteria.
How do we know Pontius didn’t make him up?
You could be Spencer. I could be Spencer. Anyone could be.
If you or Spencer want to tell me who he is, I won’t publish the matter. I would only tell a Church leader if they wanted to know.
Such traits don’t really matter to the discussion, any more than my alleged personality or spirituality defects do. What matters is the truth. You’re simply offering an argument from authority (your own belief, faith, and skepticism and desire for the truth are offered as reasons we ought to believe you rather than me). Those things don’t make you right. My Pharisaical and elitist tendencies don’t make me wrong.
You’ve also ignored, in your review, some clear falsehoods that I point out, such as there being multiple universes that are kingdoms not of glory, made to the specifications of sons of perdition by God. This contradicts scripture. And, again, if one part of this revelation is clearly false, why ought we to believe any of it?
The prophets say we must consider one option, however distasteful:
“Study it out in your mind”
In conclusion, I want to say a word about this constant refrain about “overintellectualizing” the matter.
To me, this looks like an effort to dismiss my argument without having to engage it. You get to ignore the evidence I produce and the conclusions I draw by claiming I’m somehow not approaching it in the right way. It doesn’t matter what I say, just the attitude in which I have said it. But, I could be a complete jerk, and could still be right about Spencer’s teachings. You could be the best guy on earth, and still be wrong.
But, we’re commanded in scripture to “prove all things, hold fast to that which is good” (1 Thess 5:21). That means “put things to the test.” Oliver Cowdery was told that we must “study it out in [our] mind” before we can have revelation (D&C 9:8).
Elder Maxwell taught that reason—our intellect, our logical ability—was important because:
He cautions us against
Dallin H. Oaks likewise taught:
Note the sequence: claimed revelation is first evaluated by reason. Reason acts as a screening tool. As Elder Maxwell observed elsewhere:
Joseph F. Smith wrote that “we do not accept, nor do we adopt anything contrary to divine revelation or to good common sense.” The First Presidency wrote that claimed revelations are
It takes use of our intellect to judge “known facts and demonstrated truths.” Common sense is an intellectual, rational faculty.
And, I think that many of Spencer’s claims fail the common sense test, as I have outlined in great detail. Some of his claims contradict the known truths of scripture.
So, the process that you disparage is, in fact, the one recommended by both scripture and the apostles for answering precisely these kinds of questions.
You seem to presume that I have not added any spiritual dimension to either my inquiry or my conclusions. It does not seem to me that you are placed to make that judgment. Are you?
Unlike Spencer, however, I do not presume to use any revelation I might have to instruct others on such matters. Instead, I present the results of my preliminary leg-work on the “study it out in your mind” angle, in case they are helpful to others. After that, it is up to each reader.
But, in one thing, we agree: I’ve not said anyone should not read the book. I just don’t think anyone ought to believe a great deal of what is between its covers.
And, I think the example it sets is a poor one.
————————————
[1] Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:238–239 (3 June 1866)
[2] Neal A Maxwell, A More Excellent Way: Essays on Leadership for Latter–day Saints (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1967), 69.
[3] Ibid., emphasis added.
[4] Dallin H. Oaks, The Lord’s Way (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1991), 66, emphasis added.
[5] Neal A Maxwell, A More Excellent Way: Essays on Leadership for Latter–day Saints (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1967), 29, emphasis added.
[6] Harold B. Lee, “Admonitions for the Priesthood of God,” Ensign (January 1973): 104, quoting First Presidency [Joseph F. Smith, Anthon H. Lund, Charles W. Penrose], “Editors’ Table: A Warning Voice,” Improvement Era (September 1913): 1148. The Joseph F. Smith quote is from Gospel Doctrine, 39, emphasis added.
Greg, my apologies for offending you. Intellectual battles drive away the spirit and I feel that it’s pretty much gone after this discussion. Accusations don’t help either and for that I also ask your forgiveness.
Thank you for clarifying some of the claims I made and it made me realize one mistake on my part (you clarified Claim #4 and I saw it entirely differently), but I still disagree with the overall conclusion to your assertions and will leave it at that. Things of the spirit are not all understood by reason alone and I still feel that the interpretation is too narrow for something that is a dream and that is hard for someone to convey the meaning of in mere words.
I do appreciate the time you have taken to answer this and I have learned something in the process. The recent apostasy of my brother has weighed heavily on my mind for some time and I don’t wish anyone to fall into the same trap. My apologies for making that connection. You have shown excellent faith and a determination to do what is right. He did not.
I would love to meet you sometime and talk about scriptural things as I have enjoyed someone who can take a stance and remain committed to the gospel and back up their knowledge with detailed facts, and you have done this better than I. Too many times I have tried to talk with people who are locked into their old, dead religion (non-members) and are not willing to listen to something new. At least you are defending the gospel and doing your part to keep the readers on the straight and narrow path. It is nice to see that I am having a discussion with someone of real intellect and reasoning ability and I have enjoyed the experience. I am new to the FairLDS community and will definitely be more involved in the website and materials they produce. It was a desire to help my brother that caused me to find them in the first place.
Thank you again and please accept my apologies.
I find it interesting that, the “book review” by Greg Smith attempts to conclude through facts that readers of Visions of Glory should doubt and dismiss Spencer’s experiences because they are contrary to LDS doctrine and void of spiritual truth and light. This intrigues me, because, we find ourselves here, on an LDS faith defending website, where article after article attempts to provide a foundation of facts for those critical of our LDS doctrinal BELIEFS. Ironically, any non-believer of God and scripture can use the same methods used by the reviewer to factually declare why the doctrines we Latter Day Saints BELIEVE and hold as truth are contrary to their beliefs and understanding of truth. This is akin to a Born Again Christian refusing to read the Book of Mormon because as Mike the moderator stated it is “not consistent with scripture.” His level of understanding of truth tells him that the Bible is the only word of God and that his pastor teaches good and truthful things. He’s right! However; we know there is more! If he would just rely on the Spirit to guide him, he would see how much more there is.
It is very natural for people to dispute truths that surpass their level of understanding through the use of facts, statements and historical accounts commensurate with their level of understanding. This is human nature. However; as active LDS members of the Church of Jesus Christ who have access to truths that make up the fullness of the Gospel as well as the Gift of the Holy Ghost, why would we choose to reject potential further light and knowledge simply because it lies outside our current level of understanding and interpretation of Church doctrine and scripture? Of all the people in the world, we should embrace anything of good report or praiseworthy and through interpretation of the Spirit glean what light and knowledge we can. Joseph learned this when inquiring about the Apocrypha. D&C 91: 1, 4-6 states the following:
1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you concerning the Apocrypha—There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly;
4 Therefore, whoso readeth it, let him understand, for the Spirit manifesteth truth;
5 And whoso is enlightened by the Spirit shall obtain benefit therefrom;
6 And whoso receiveth not by the Spirit, cannot be benefited.
The bottom line; facts, evidence and deduction cannot, never have been and never will be sufficient in bringing people unto Christ. Facts and evidence, independent of spiritual confirmation by the Holy Ghost have never been sufficient in determining spiritual truths. All ten of the virgins had lamps and a source for oil. Only five filled their lamps with sufficient oil.
I think the research and facts provided by Greg are indisputable truths in their proper context because I have a testimony of prophets and apostles. I even think that the warnings Greg has displayed by historical prophets and apostles are wise and pertinent to something. However, I think his conclusions pertaining to the veracity of Visions of Glory, based upon his interpretation and analysis is incorrect and fallible, not because of a factual argument, but because the Spirit tells me so. So even though I believe Greg is citing apostolic and prophetic statements, I am left to conclude that I am lacking some understanding, context or insight beyond my own intellect and Greg’s. I trust the Spirit and know how to recognize the Spirit such that I must question my own understanding and interpretation of “facts” that Greg has cited. As much as Mike the moderator wants a valid fact based rebuttal to Greg’s problems with John’s book, facts can do nothing but speculate, estimate and in most cases incorrectly deduce incorrect conclusions. Until someone accepts that they lack wisdom and decide to ask of God, that individual is left reliant on their imperfect level of intellect, understanding, pride and speculation. All of which will lead you to an incomplete, imperfect answer. Though this may be the way the world works to determine truths, it is simply imperfect and fallible. Pure revelation is not.
When I lack wisdom, which is often because I am not yet wise, I choose to rely on personal revelation for understanding and enlightenment. I don’t trust my own understanding. I lack wisdom. I lack contextual understanding of historical apostolic and prophetic quotes. I lack a thorough understanding of any scripture read, when read without the Spirit of understanding. This may sound like an easy way out of an intellectually based critique of Visions of Glory or a proper debate of the reviewer’s comments. Ultimately, I guess it is. It is an easy way out! It is the only way out of an imperfect Telestial way of thinking and understanding. I love that we all have the option of transcending our imperfect mortal minds. What a great blessing to be able to rely on the Father’s interpretation, understanding, analysis and conclusions! Why in the world would I trust my own or someone else’s imperfect, limited, human conclusions and interpretations on matters of such significant importance? To me, the things I read in Visions of Glory are potentially tremendously significant! To not rely on the Spirit for proper guidance, interpretation and understanding when reading anything of potential eternal significance is simply short sighted. How arrogantly short sighted I would be to believe that my current level of understanding and interpretation of scripture or prophetic counsel would trump the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Don’t worry. That is kind of you; I wasn’t offended. (Hence my smiley face.) People have said far, far worse. In fact, some are probably doing so as we speak. 😉
[A pastime for some on an apostate message board is to decorate my photo with graffiti. At least it keeps them off the streets.]
I merely point out that when a discussion involves such things, it doesn’t get to the points at issue. We’ve all made the mistake at somepont, so please don’t worry about it.
I have not argued that they are all understood by reason alone. I don’t believe they are. But, they should not require us to accept things that “make reason stare,” with logical contradictions.
And, I have great difficulty reading the many statements by prophets and apostles and not thinking that Spencer and Pontius are doing precisely what they have asked us not to do.
If something is not to be understood by words, that is another good reason not to publish it—because people with the best will in the world will misunderstand it. One can choose to tell a spiritual experience when so moved. One cannot control who will read an account we write and release to the public.
We hope that they will be useful to you and others. The loss of faith among family members is a very difficult thing, and many/most FAIR members know something of that experience, or have worked closely with those who have.
Our goal is always to defend the truth of the restored gospel, and to call attention to those things which, in our judgment, undercut the effectiveness or authority of those called to lead the Church.
But, we emphasize that we speak and act only for ourselves.
You would have to demonstrate that this is what is happening here.
It is also very natural for those who cannot answer an argument to simply appeal to their superior spirituality or insight as to why they are correct.
It is not like that at all. I have not refused to read Spencer’s book—I have read it very carefully.
I have not refused to study it, or to compare it with truths I already accept—I have done so.
I have, simply, found it wanting. You are welcome to demonstrate in what way my explanations are false or in error. Perhaps what I think is a contradiction is not one. Or, perhaps my reading of scripture is in error, and should be modified by Spencer’s claims.
But, you have not made this type of argument.
I do not reject potential further light and knowledge. I reject, pending further information, Spencer’s pretensions to provide further light and knowledge on rational grounds because:
* Some of what he offers contradicts LDS scripture
* Church leaders have been clear that what Spencer (if he exists) and Pontius are doing is inappropriate.
I might also dismiss it on spiritual evidence, were I inclined to discuss that angle here.
But, without resolving (1) and (2) to my satisfaction, it is difficult to believe his claims. I cannot believe two facts that contradict each other—some people can, though.
I have never argued that they would, nor has FAIR.
But, the Holy Ghost will not bear witness of falsehood, of facts and evidence that are false.
And, like I wrote in the previous post, you are ignoring the process as set out in scripture and the teachings of the prophets and apostles. First we apply our best intellectual efforts to the question. Then (and only then) can we expect revelation—though revelation may accompany us as we seek to “study it out in our minds.”
And, if things do not make sense to our minds and our hearts, we must question whether revelation has occurred, because both must be involved. Thus, for something to seem logically contradictory, for example, is a good sign that we have not yet had revelation about it.
Of course they are potentially significant. They’re also potentially in error, or even potentially pernicious.
But, if all one knows is that they are potentially significant, can we be said to have had revelation about them? I doubt it—because revelation would let us know.
Again, you seem to be claiming that I have not used an spiritual approaches in this matter. Are you entitled to that knowledge or insight? I think not.
I would not made an appeal to such spiritual grounds because (unlike Spencer) I do not believe it appropriate to appeal to it about these types of matters.[1]
But, that is quite a different question as to whether I have used such an approach. What I have presented here is the first part of the exercise—the public part. The private, personal revelation—well, that must be done by each reader.
But, if readers such as yourself have it revealed that it is true, then you ought to be given answers to the questions I have posed, and I have seen no such answers presented here.
That may be. But, such “evidence” does not help anyone else. It cannot be appealed to in order to convince others. It is for you alone. That is the nature of spiritual witness.
So, it seems to me that if you cannot explain why my reading of the evidence and prophetic statements is incorrect, others can be forgiven for not following you. You don’t seem to have much to help us with the discussion.
Because, after all, there is another option—that you are misinterpreting what you are being told spiritually.
Again, if one has not been told in mind and heart, then is the revelatory process complete?
Back to the prophets and apostles
I repeat, we might do well to look to the prophets and apostles. Have they endorsed such publications? Encouraged them? No—they have discouraged them in clear-cut terms—unless you can offer a reading that explains away all of these statements.
You do not seem to have been able to find an answer to my readings—merely suggesting that you don’t know the full context or meaning, and that if you understood that, then it would be clear that what “Spencer” is doing is approved or encouraged.
I, on the other hand, think that the context and meaning are crystal clear, repeated over-and-over, and do not leave much room for doubt. The only reason to question my reading is because you wish to endorse Spencer’s writing—there is nothing about the statements that would lead someone to that conclusion otherwise.
The prophets and apostles seem to me to tell us that Spencer’s choice is either foolish or malign. Neither is a recommendation for paying much attention to his claims.
It would, to echo your phrase, be “simply short sighted” to ignore the clear and repeated teachings of prophets and apostles when faced with this question, unless you can help us see how we should read these multiple statements.
But, each must make his own decision.
————————-
[1] Once the prophets or scriptures have spoken about an issue, you are welcome to my opinion if you really want it. Or, occasionally, even if you don’t, if you read the wrong blog. 🙂
Greg,
I hope that this phrase is not applied to me as I would be offended at it:
I hope that I have shown that I definitely have “studied it out in my mind” and thought a great deal about this. I just want to make sure its not about me before I spend more time on this to refute it.
Sorry, a typo — I mean, “like I said in my previous POST”.
🙂
I edited it to correct this. Apologies.
GLS
One test of the Book of Mormon is that it encourages a person to do good things and be a better person. It makes a clear distinction of what is good and what is evil and it shows what the results will be if a person does good things and what will happen to them if they do evil things. I can find nothing in Visions of Glory that encourages a person to do evil or bad things. On the contrary, you come away from reading it wanting to get your life in order as best as you possibly can in case the things Spencer talks about happen relatively soon. It also encourages me to prepare physically for a whomping big earthquake in Utah. I would especially shy away from living in Utah County. Also, and I don’t have an agenda or anything for saying this, but I understand that most past historical cataclysmic earth changing events have happened 14 days before or 14 days after a full solar eclipse and that most major earthquakes happen when there’s a full moon. Spencer seems to say that the big event happens in the fall, so I looked up when we’ll get a full solar eclipse in the fall. The next one is August of 2017 and it’s 14 days from a full moon. Hmm.
My last post did not get into some of the things others have posted here, so I wanted to add that somewhere it talks about having three witnesses to the truth of something. Well, we have a lot of prophecies of the last days events from those we revere as prophets. Some of them are in the Appendix of Visions of Glory. There are plenty more just like them. Consider that as one witness of those events. Visions of Glory is a second. The events he describes are events we’ve heard about all our lives except that we didn’t have a chronology of when they might occur or what might start off the tribulation. There is a third witness. A woman named Menet who doesn’t say she’s a Mormon but who had some near death experiences that parallel closely those of Spencer. The difference is that she describes the chronology of events leading up to the earthquake whereas Spencer only talks of what happens afterwards. Put them together and you get an idea of the whole series of events. Another thing to consider is that all through the scriptures people are given choices that will lead to different futures. In these examples a prophet says if the people act one way the future will be thus and so. If they act another way the future will be different. Just because Spencer or the Menet woman saw their representation of the future doesn’t mean that it will be the one each of us as individuals will experience because we have the gift of choice.
Bruce, I think the problem with your claim above is that it is only a “good” to be encouraged to, say, “especially shy away from living in Utah County” if Spencer’s is, in fact, a true revelation. And, even if it were a true revelation, it would not come to the anonymous “Spencer,” but to a recognized prophet/apostle.
Besides, the multiple witnesses promised do not come from unrecognized or unauthorized sources.
This type of mistaken conclusion illustrates precisely why Spencer’s enterprise is either misguided or malign–you have, I’m afraid, proven my point.
In contrast to Spencer, here’s what an actual prophet said about such matters (which Sunday School attendees may have heard just today):
You will note he says nothing about worrying about earthquakes or moving out of Utah County, or poring over supposed revelation from anonymous sources to learn how we ought to prepare.
Somehow, I suspect that if we need the message Spencer wants to give us, the genuine prophets will find us.
I appreciate everyone’s interest in my review of Pontius’ book; I will be out of the country for several days, however, and so I won’t be able to answer any more questions, concerns, or objections.
My best to all.