CLAIM: "Joseph Smith said that a mortal person had to have the priesthood in order to see God and live. But since he didn't have the priesthood in 1820 he could not have really seen God."
|
|
When D&C 84:21-22 is analyzed in context, it is apparent that the critics have misread LDS scripture:
- [19] "And this greater [i.e., Melchizedek] priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God. [20] Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. [21] And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh; [22] For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live."
The word "this" in verse 22 does not refer to the Melchizedek Priesthood, but rather to "the power of godliness."[1] One of the ordinances of the Melchizeddek Priesthood is the bestowal of the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (see DC 49꞉14). As the Lord explained in an 1831 revelation, "no man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God" (DC 67꞉11).
Joseph described this quickening in several recitations of his First Vision.
To read more:
|
CLAIM: Joseph Smith gave nine different accounts of what happened during the First Vision. He just couldn't keep his story straight - even when it came to who his heavenly visitors were.
|
|
- The first three accounts listed are obviously not about the 1820 First Vision but rather the 1823 angel Moroni visitation. Critics lump this material together with verifiable First Vision accounts because they want to create the perception of a problem where none exists. They want to make it appear as though Joseph Smith's first claimed visionary experience was of an angel but he later changed it into an encounter with Deity to be more impressive - the angel story then being refashioned as a second meeting with divine beings.
- The fourth account listed is from an 1832 unpublished history written partly by the Prophet himself. Critics focus on the fact that in this text only Jesus Christ is described as making an appearance to Joseph Smith - the Father is not visibly there. But they fail to notice that the Father's First Vision testimony is, in fact, mentioned in the opening paragraph of this particular history and it directly precedes the First Vision recital. And they do not seem to be aware that the Prophet deliberately constructed this narrative to parallel the theophany experienced by the apostle Paul. FAIRWiki link
- The fifth account listed as 1834 was produced by Oliver Cowdery. The critics do not seem to be aware that this two-part history (1834/35) began by telling the orthodox First Vision story but then switched over to the Book of Mormon story because of a request made by William W. Phelps. When this document is carefully evaluated its usefullness for the anti-Mormon agenda evaporates. http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Oliver_Cowdery_not_aware_of_First_Vision_in_1834-35
- The sixth account is 1835a. It could also be labeled as the Robert Mathias interview of November 9th. The two personages who are listed as appearing in this recital are obviously the Father and Son. This becomes apparent when the text is compared to the 1832, 1838, and 1842 accounts.
- 1835a - "another personage soon appeared like unto the first"
- 1842 - "two glorious personages who exactly resembled each other in features, and likeness"
- 1835a - "he testifyed unto me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God"
- 1838 - "This is my beloved Son"
- 1835a - "he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee"
- 1832 - "he spake unto me saying,'Joseph, my son, thy sins are forgiven thee'"
- The seventh account is 1835b or the Erastus Holmes interview of November 14th. This is another instance of trying to create a problem when none exists. The critics try to claim an inconsistency when they point out that the Prophet says here that when he was fourteen years old he had his "first visitation of angels." But just five days before - in the 1835a account - the Prophet stated that he saw "many angels" IN ADDITION TO the two main personages. Thus, Joseph Smith's first visitation of angels occurred during the First Vision theophany.
- The eighth account is the 1838 recital which was eventually included in the canon of the LDS Church. The heavenly visitants are clearly identified as the Father and Son.
- The ninth account is difficult to pin down in the DVD format because there are no references provided. It could be the 1844 I. Daniel Rupp reprint of the 1842 Wentworth Letter or it could be the Alexander Neibaur 1844 diary entry. The claim is made in the DVD that the Prophet's visitors are "unidentified" in this account. If this is the Rupp reprint then the comment is irrelevant because the Prophet also published the official Church history in 1842 (at also the same time of year) and the Father and Son are unmistakably identified in that account. If reference is being made to the Neibaur dairy entry the comment is similarly unimpressive since the Neibaur notes do indeed identify the personages as the Father and Son.
The DVD fails to mention an 1843 interview with a newspaper editor from Pittsburgh wherein Jospeh Smith identified his visitors in the grove as the Father and Son. The DVD claims inconsistency in Joseph Smith identifying his First Vision visitants. This is clearly not the case.
|
CLAIM: Joseph Smith was "known around the country as a fabricator of stories." Even his own mother was concerned about his habit of making things up.
|
|
The claim of Joseph Smith being known "around the country" as a liar is not backed up with any specific reference. Joseph's father-in-law is mentioned as a source for this accusation, but the audience is not told that he (Isaac Hale) was an embittered man because Joseph Smith eloped with his daughter when he would not consent to their marriage. Isaac did not believe in the divine calling of his son-in-law but his daughter Emma (Joseph's wife) did because she played an active role in the Restoration and gained a witness of its truthfulness for herself. It is extremely difficult for critics to pretend that Joseph Smith was a liar about his divine calling when other people stood in the presence of angels with him, saw the same visions that he was shown, and even heard the voice of God at the same time that he did.
The claim that Joseph Smith's mother was "concerned" about Joseph telling stories is a case of wrenching a quotation out of proper context. Lucy Mack Smith simply says in her autobiography that her son told the family about information connected with the angel and the Book of Mormon plates (see Anderson, ed., Lucy's Book, 345). Lucy told the same information to Wandle Mace about seven year prior to producing her autobiography and clarified that the information was related to the "Nephites" and was shown by vision. In Joseph Smith's own official history he confirmed that he learned this information through the power of visions (Times and Seasons, vol. 3, no. 9, 1 March 1842, 707) and Oliver Cowdery made note of the same thing (Messenger and Advocate, vol. 1, no. 7, April 1835, 112). Thus, the origin of the stories mentioned by Joseph's mother was a heavenly one - she was not even implying that her son was the teller of tall tales.
|
CLAIM: There is inconsistency in Joseph Smith's dating of the First Vision event and also in the message that was said to be delivered during the experience.
|
|
See the following FAIRwiki articles:
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Different_age_provided_in_the_1832_text
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/1832_account_doesn%27t_mention_new_dispensation
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/1832_account_doesn%27t_forbid_joining_a_church
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/1832_says_wicked_will_be_destroyed_but_1838_doesn%27t
|
Claim: President Brigham Young "denied that the Lord came to Joseph Smith in the First Vision. Young stated that Joseph had actually been visited by an angel, [who] informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day."
|
|
The edited version of Brigham Young's remarks that critics like to use reads as follows:
- "It is most likely these inconsistencies which led Brigham Young in 1855 to preach a sermon in which he denied that the Lord came to Joseph Smith in the First Vision. Young stated that Joseph had actually been visited by an angel which informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day. 'The Lord did not come...but He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith...and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day....' (Journal of Discourses, 2:171)"
Note the use of ellipses in this quote, indicating that information has been left out from the original source. A reading of the original source indicates that Brigham Young was not saying that the Lord didn't come—just that the "Lord did not come with the armies of heaven, in power and great glory," to visit Joseph Smith. This is true; He did not. What did He do? He visited simply, with His Son, and then He sent further messengers, just as Brigham states.
It is clear from other sermons by Brigham Young that he was quite aware of the details of the First Vision as published by Joseph Smith in 1842, well before the 1855 address cited above:
- Joseph Smith called at age fourteen: JD, 8:353–54 (1861); JD, 12:67-68 (1867)
- He was called as a youth: JD, 2:171 (1855); JD, 7:243 (1859)
- There was a revival or reformation: JD, 12:67–68 (1867)
- He was told the churches were wrong, and not to join any church: JD, 2:171 (1855); JD, 12:67–68 (1867)
Late in his life Brigham Young stated:
- Why was Joseph Smith persecuted? Why was he hunted from neighborhood to neighborhood, from city to city, and from State to State, and at last suffered death? Because he received revelations from the Father, from the Son, and was ministered to by holy angels.
- —Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 18:231. off-site wiki (17 September 1876)
The charge that President Brigham Young said an angel inaugurated the last dispensation instead of Deity cannot be supported. Evidence suggests that President Young's 1855 sermon is closely paraphrasing distinct First Vision story elements that were publicly available to all of the Saints in 1842.
To read more:
|
|
