I ran across this list online and wanted to share it. I love the questions, hope you do too.
The Church tells us:
"A believing boy took one small step and prayed. A loving Father in Heaven listened and responded. What has resulted could rightfully be referred to as one giant leap for mankind. All the towers ever built and all the spaceships ever launched pale in comparison to Joseph Smith's first vision. Though men fly higher and higher into the heavens, they will not find God or see his face unless they humble themselves, pray, and heed the truths revealed through the Prophet of the Restoration (Joseph Smith)."
"Some have foolishly said, 'Take away Joseph Smith and his prayer in the grove and the First Vision, and we can accept your message.' Such people would have us bury the treasure of saving truths already cited, and many more, and turn our backs on the most important event that has taken place in all world history from the day of Christ's ministry to the glorious hour when the First Vision occurred."
- Elder Carlos E. Asay, "One Small Step for a Man; One Giant Leap for Mankind," Ensign, May 1990, page 62
So I have several questions about the First Vision Story:
1. Why didn't Joseph Smith write the "official" version of the First Vision?
In fact, the Joseph Smith History in the Pearl of Great Price was written by a scribe, James Mulholland, and went unpublished for years. There are earlier versions of the First Vision story in Joseph Smith's own handwriting, but they are not considered "official" and are relatively ignored by the church.
2. If the official First Vision story was so important, why did it go unpublished until 1842?
Smith supposedly had his vision in 1820. Yet it took over seven private revisions and another 22 years to have it first published.
3. If Jesus Christ and God the Father really told Joseph Smith in 1820 that all churches were an abomination, then why did he try joining the Methodist church in June of 1828?
Records show that in June of 1828, Joseph Smith applied for membership in his wife's Methodist Church. He also joined Methodist classes taught there. (The Amboy Journal, Amboy, IL, details Smith's activity in the Methodist Church in 1828. April 30, 1879 p. 1; May 21, 1879 p.1; June 11, 1879, p.1; July 2, 1879 p.1.)
4. If Joseph Smith saw God in 1820, why did he pray in his room in 1823 to find out "if a Supreme being did exist?"
In the first history of Mormonism from 1835 written under Joseph Smith's direction, it says that the night of September 1823 Joseph Smith began praying in his bed to learn "the all important information, if a Supreme being did exist, to have an assurance that he was accepted of him." (LDS periodical Messenger and Advocate, Kirtland, Ohio, Feb. 1835) How could that possibly make sense if Smith had already seen God face-to-face some three years earlier in 1820?
See: http://www.irr.org/mit/First-Vision-Scans/first-vision-1834-35.html
5. Why did Joseph Smith fail to mention his First Vision when he first wrote a 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-Scans/first-vision-1834-35.html
6. If Joseph Smith could not deny that he saw God, then why did his own handwritten accounts deny it?
In the other First Vision accounts, including one handwritten by Joseph Smith himself, he does not say that he saw God the Father. Instead, these earlier accounts refer to an angel, a spirit, many angels, or the Son. Yet in the "official" account, it says Joseph Smith saw God and knew God knew it, and therefore despite persecution, he dared not deny or change his story.
See: http://www.irr.org/mit/First-Vision-Scans/first-vision-1832.html
7. If Joseph Smith's First Vision was the most important historical event since the atonement, then why didn't early church members know about it?
The early church all but ignored this "one giant leap for mankind:"
"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
8. If it really happened, why couldn't Joseph Smith tell a consistent story about such a powerful experience as meeting with God and Jesus Christ face-to-face?
How many people forget where they were when their first child was born? Or when they got their patriarchal blessing? Or their wedding night? How many forget who they were with and what happened? If we can remember details such as year, circumstance and those involved, why couldn't Joseph Smith consistently recall basic facts about his incredible First Vision?
9. Why does the "official" First Vision story contradict Joseph Smith's own handwritten testimony?
In Joseph Smith's first handwritten testimony of the first vision in 1832, he says he already knew all other churches were false before he prayed. Smith testified: "by searching the scriptures I found that mankind did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatised from the true and living faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ."
See: http://www.irr.org/mit/First-Vision-Scans/first-vision-1832.html
Yet in the "official" story written years later by a scribe, it has Joseph Smith saying: "I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong) and which I should join."
In fact, looking at all the versions of the first vision story, you see a pattern of contradictions and evolution, not a pattern of mere elaboration on a single original experience.
10. If Joseph Smith saw God the Father in the flesh with with a body in 1820, why did he teach later than God the Father did not have a physical body?
Up until the last version of the "First Vision" story, Joseph Smith taught that God the Father did not have a body.
For example, in 1835 Joseph Smith taught a class of Elders the "Lectures on Faith" which were also printed in the scripture volume Doctrine and Covenants. In this original Doctrine and Covenants, Joseph Smith stated that God the Father was a personage of spirit. In Section 5 we find this statement about the Godhead:
"The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man."
- Doctrine and Covenants, 1835 Edition, p. 53
The Prophet Joseph Smith himself signed a statement which was printed in the Preface to this 1835 Edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. In this statement he testified:
"The first part of the book will be found to contain a series of Lectures as delivered before a Theological class in this place, and in consequence of their embracing the important doctrine of salvation, we have arranged them into the following work."
President Joseph Fielding Smith also explained that the Prophet Joseph Smith helped prepare this part of scripture:
"Now the Prophet did know about these Lectures on Faith, because he helped to prepare them, and he helped also to revise these lectures before they were published [in the Doctrine and Covenants]."
- Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, page 195
Actually, these teachings were considered complete with regard to their doctrine concerning the Godhead at the time they were given.
On page 58 of the 1835 Edition of the Doctrine and Covenants the following question and answer appear:
"Q. Does the foregoing account of the Godhead lay a sure foundation for the exercise of faith in him unto life and salvation?"
"A. It does."
11. Why did Joseph Smith's mother, in the extensive history of her son's life, not mention Joseph ever having a vision from God and Jesus Christ, or that he was persecuted for it?
According to the "official" story, Joseph Smith told his mother his first vision story. Although Lucy Mack Smith, the mother of Joseph Smith Jr., wrote a lot of details about her son during the early 1820s, in her history of Joseph's life she did not mention him ever having a visitation from God and Jesus Christ. Nor does she mention any persecution.
You would think that Lucy would mention such an astounding event in her son's life. This was a bigger event than a big foot sighting; this was a visit from God and Jesus Christ! But apparently despite Joseph telling his mother, it was not significant enough for her to mention it in the extensive biography she wrote about her son.
The only element of the first vision story that Lucy mentions is religious revivals around Palmyra, yet she dates them to 1823, not 1820. Historical records of the time corroborate Lucky Mack Smith's dating of revivals in 1823 and none in Palmyra during 1820. See: http://www.irr.org/mit/fvision.html
Let's not forget what recent church leaders have said about the importance of the First Vision:
http://www.i4m.com/think/intro/must_believe_vision.htm
June 3, 2008 at 8:50 AM
Hear this sydney,
That old false prophet joseph smith was not having a vision.
He was having a wet dream.
And from all the heart ache and suffering that mormonism has caused.
That wet dream had to be a nightmare.
Because as a former mormon I know that mormonism causes hurt to a lot of people.
Because in joseph smith wet dream he was thinking of how he could molest under age girls and then said the lord told him to do it just to try to get away with it.
In his wet dream he was thinking about greed and treasure hunts,especially for other men wives.
Thats why he used a peep stone to so call translate that 19 century fiction book that is known as the bom.
In his racist wet dream he was thinking of ways to continue to spread hate and racism by saying blacks are from the seed of cain,and that is why we have dark skin,because according to joseph smith it is a punishment from God.
Joseph Smith The False Prophet Of Our Time.
The cat is out of the bag the mormon cult is not true.
EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT.
June 4, 2008 at 3:24 AM
Oh for the love of....are you kidding me??
I don't think I'll bother responding to that comment above, its absolutely without merit and completely ridiculous/unintelligent/completely contrived/conspiracy theorist rubbish....
If you honestly believe that Donangelo...then you must also confess that Moses, Isaac, Abraham also had rather 'nasty' dreams....and what of the 'dead sea scrolls' which seem to point to Christ having more than one wife???
What about Paul? Did he not write that women should subject themselves to their husbands and that they shouldn't 'speak' in church? Does that make him a sexist a**hole?
Think before you post in the future cause right now you are achieving the impossible, offending me.....
June 4, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Nicko listen,
Don't you dare disrespect my beloved precious lord and savior Jesus Christ like that.
Because you mormons have once again proven that you don't believe in the biblical Jesus Christ by your statements alone.
You mormons are pirates who are lost.
Who are full of hate and lies.
And the holy bible tells us that the devil is the father of lies.
And you mormons lie all the time just like the lie what you just said about the dead sea scrolls.
Because they say no such of things.
It once again show how arrogant and and twisted you mormons really is.
To speak that way about the Christ who died for our sins at the cross.
But it never surprises me at how just vile you mormons really are.
Because the biblical Jesus Christ was never married according to holy bible scriptures.
Because Jesus Christ is the only perfect pure and holy lamb.
That is why in the book of revelation Jesus the Christ was the only perfect holy worthy one who was able to open the seals and judgements of God.
That's why all of you mormons are going to hell revelation 21-8
June 4, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Donangelo,
You have to remember that you are not showing much respect to Nicko or his beliefs, therefore you cannot demand it for yourself.
You will get the same respect that you show. You earn it.
Labeling him as "You Mormons" isn't right. You and I both agree that the church isn't what it claims to be, but there is a way to discuss things rationally and respectfully, and I don't think you do that.
You have judged Nicko's character, and you should apologize because that is something a good Christian shouldn't do.
June 4, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Donangelo,
Please remember to be respectful. You have no right to tell someone else they are going to hell. That is something the Mormon Church does, right? Why are you falling into that trap? Be better than that.
June 4, 2008 at 12:12 PM
I totally agree with you Sydney,
But it really gets next to me when nicko says vile and awful things about me and your savior Jesus Christ.
Because we all know sid that Jesus Christ is and was holy.
And for nicko to speak that way about the savior who died for us is very troubling and disturbing.
And remember Sydney it is not what I say it is what God says and command.
That is why when I try to make a point I back it up with biblical scriptures and verses.
Because as a born again christian I am still learning and striving to be a better christian who loves at all times sydney.
Like sydney for example I also did not like the comment that oh nicko made when he said he did not feel sorry for you.
Syd you can just sense the arrogance in oh nicko's comments it is unacceptable.
I still love you sid and everyone else.
June 4, 2008 at 2:05 PM
donangelo,
What you don't seem to understand is that your comments are just as arrogant as you claim Nicko's to be. Many of the things you have said are unacceptable, so you don't really have the right to tell someone else that they are being unacceptable.
As the owner of this blog, I think that decision is mine.
June 4, 2008 at 5:24 PM
It is your decision Sydney and I am sorry if I offended you or nicko.
But all I am trying to do is spread some love and truth and hope in what I am sure is a difficult situation.
Because remember Syd I am also a former mormon who is still healing from the lies and cover up of the mormon cult.
But I am truly sorry if I crossed the line and offended anyone.
And I hope Syd that you would accept my apollogy.
Because as owner of this blog syd it is your decision Sydney to say what is and is not acceptable.
I'm sorry if I offended nicko also.
June 4, 2008 at 10:39 PM
I tell you what, I'll retract that comment because the Dead Sea Scrolls are very ambiguous and hardly worth getting heated up about. One side of the scholarly debate on them suggests that there is no mention of Christ at all whilst the other suggests that Christ is 'symbolically' discussed and that it does mention that he was married to Mary Magdelene.
For the record, the church doesn't take any position on this nor does it advocate or deny that Christ was indeed married. I'll reserve my judgement on this issue for now. I apologise if my suggestion of what is basically theory offended you donangelo.
However,
You keep spouting off that JS was an evil man who practiced plural marriage, but how do you justify Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, King David before he lost his way? All evil men? How do you justify these men? Simply saying that JS is evil because he had more than one wife is the same as stating that Abraham was also evil because he had more than one wife....
And stop declaring my 'going to hell' because you've got no scriptural evidence to suggest that I am any more than yourself. And who do you thank for the Bible anyway?? Do you believe Jews are going to hell too??
Believe what you want however cause in the end, I don't care...