Mormonism and Wikipedia/First Vision/Interpretations and responses to the vision


Recorded accounts of the vision
A FairMormon Analysis of Wikipedia: Mormonism and Wikipedia/First Vision
 A work by a collaboration of authors (Link to Wikipedia article here)
The name Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.. Wikipedia content is copied and made available under the GNU Free Documentation License.

An analysis of the Wikipedia article "First Vision" (Section Version 1/2/2010)

The article is indeed one of the most neutral articles about Mormon doctrine on Wikipedia, and I'll do my best to keep it as neutral as one non-Mormon can.
—Wikipedia editor John "Foxe" (6 October 2007) off-site
∗       ∗       ∗

Interpretations and responses to the vision (Section Version 1/2/2010)

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion

Early awareness by Latter Day Saints (Section Version 1/2/2010)

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion
  • The importance of the First Vision within the Latter Day Saint movement evolved over time. Early adherents were unaware of the details of the vision until 1840, when the earliest accounts were published in Great Britain. An account of the First Vision was not published in the United States until 1842, shortly before Joseph Smith's death. Jan Shipps has written that the vision was "practically unknown" until an account of it was published in 1842.
  • Jan Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985), 30. The first extant account of the First Vision is the manuscript account in Joseph Smith, "Manuscript History of the Church" (1839); the first published account is Orson Pratt, An Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions and of the Late Discovery of Ancient American Records (Edinburgh: Ballantyne and Hughes, 1840); and the first American publication is Joseph Smith's letter to John Wentworth in Times and Seasons, 3 (March 1842), 706-08, only two years before Smith's assassination. (These accounts are available in Dan Vogel, ed., Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1996), volume 1.) As the LDS historian Richard Bushman has written in his authoritative biography, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005), "At first, Joseph was reluctant to talk about his vision. Most early converts probably never heard about the 1820 vision." (39)
  •  Correct, per cited sources
  • From Bushman:

At first, Joseph was reluctant to talk about his vision. Most early converts probably never heard about the 1820 vision. "The angel of the Lord says that we must be careful not to proclaim these things or to mention them abroad," he told his parents after one early vision. A subsequent vision of the angel who led him to the gold plates was not mentioned in the first edition of the Book of Mormon. (Bushman, Rough Stone Rolling, p. 39)

Interpretation and use by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Section Version 1/2/2010)

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion
  • Improvement Era (November 1961), 868.
  •  Citation abuse— The meaning of a source quotation has been altered, or the source used does not support the author's conclusion.
    Violated by John "Foxe" —Diff: off-site
    Note that the editor originally wrote "Hugh Nibley admitted" rather than "noted," thus implying that something was being hidden. The wiki editor has distorted Nibley's intent—He was pointing out that reticence about mentioning the First Vision does not mean that Brigham didn't believe that it didn't occur, but that such matters were so sacred that they should not be talked about lightly, or without permission.
  •  References not included in the Wikipedia article
    In the Tabernacle in Salt Lake City on 1 September 1859 Brigham Young referred to Joseph Smith’s published history, which includes the 1838 First Vision account. He asked,

“[H]ave I yet lived to the state of perfection that I can commune in person with the Father and the Son at my will and pleasure? No... Joseph Smith in his youth had revelations from God. He saw and understood for himself. Are you acquainted with his life? You can read the history of it. I was acquainted with him during many years. He had heavenly visions; angels administered to him” (Providences of God, etc., Journal of Discourses 7:243])

  • Full context of the Nibley quote (full text available online here):

If among a hundred fairly consistent reports of the first vision story three or four differ radically, that is simply to be expected; their existence does not discredit the consensus. And where such intimate and personal things as unique revelations to individuals are concerned it would be very strange indeed if wild aberrations and wide discrepancies did not appear in the reports. We know the policy of the early leaders regarding the reporting of revelations. A favorite theme of Brigham Young's was the tangible, personal nature of God, which he never illustrates by any mention of the first vision. Why not? He has explained at length:

That man who cannot know things without telling any other living being upon the earth, who cannot keep his secrets and those that God reveals to him, never can receive the voice of his Lord…Should you receive a vision of revelation from the Almighty…you should shut it up and seal it as close, and lock it as tight as heaven is to you, and make it as secret as the grave. The Lord has no confidence in those who reveal secrets, for he cannot safely reveal Himself to such persons…If a person understands God…and the Lord reveals anything to that individual no matter what, unless he gives permission to disclose it, it is locked up in eternal silence.[1]

[1] Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 4:287-88., (emphasis added).

  • John Taylor gave a complete account of the First Vision story in an 1850 letter written as he began missionary work in France,
  • "[Joseph Smith] mind was troubled, he saw contention instead of peace; and division instead of union; and when he reflected upon the multifarious creeds and professions there were in existence, he thought it impossible for all to be right, and if God taught one, He did not teach the others, "for God is not the author of confusion." In reading his bible, he was remarkably struck with the passage in James, 1st chapter, 5th verse, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him." Believing in the word of God, he retired into a grove, and called upon the Lord to give him wisdom in relation to this matter. While he was thus engaged, he was surrounded by a brilliant light, and two glorious personages presented themselves before him, who exactly resembled each other in features, and who gave him information upon the subjects which had previously agitated his mind. He was given to understand that the churches were all of them in error in regard to many things; and he was commanded not to go after them; and he received a promise that the 'fulness' of the gospel should at some future time be unfolded unto him: after which the vision withdrew, leaving his mind in a state of calmness and peace." John Taylor, Letter to the Editor of the Interpreter Anglais et Français, Boulogne-sur-mer (25 June 1850).
  • Editor John "Foxe" presents this odd argument to justify an attempt to remove Taylor's quote, which now appears in the footnote:

I eliminated the quotation from the Taylor letter of 1850 on the grounds that it doesn't refer to the First Vision; at best it's a conflation of the First Vision and the Moroni Vision. Again, you could always say that 'apologists argue.' John "Foxe" (20 October 2007) off-site

  • "Apologists" need argue no such thing—simply read Taylor's account and compare it to Joseph's 1838 account.
  • 1850:John Taylor, Letter to the Editor of the Interpreter Anglais et Français, Boulogne-sur-mer (25 June 1850). (emphasis added) Reprinted in John Taylor, Millennial Star 12 no. 15 (1 August 1850), 235–236.
  • 1850:John Taylor, Aux amis de la vérité réligieuse. Récit abregé du commencement, des progres, de l’éstablissement, des persecutions, de la foi et de la doctrine de l’Église de Jésus-Christ des Saints des Derniers Jours (Paris 1850). [Translation: To friends of religious truth. An abridged account of the beginning, progress, establishment, persecutions, the faith, and the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.]
  • and he may have alluded to it in a discourse given in 1859.
  • "What could the Lord do with such a pack of ignorant fools as we were? There was one man that had a little good sense, and a spark of faith in the promises of god and that was Joseph Smith-a backwoods man. He believed a certain portion of scripture which said-"If any man lack wisdom let him ask of God who to all men liberally and upbraideth not." He was fool enough in the eyes of the world, and wise enough in the eyes of God and angels, and all true intelligence to go into a secret place to ask God for wisdom, believing that God would hear him. The Lord did hear him, and told him what to do." Deseret News (Weekly), December 28, 1859, 337
  • Why bother to imply that there was an "allusion" in 1859, when it has already been demonstrated that Taylor had a clear understanding of the First Vision in 1850?
  •  References not included in the Wikipedia article
    On 13 August 1857 John Taylor and several members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve placed a copy of the Pearl of Great Price (containing the First Vision story) inside the southeast cornerstone of the Salt Lake Temple (Wilford Woodruff Journal, Brigham Young Journal)
  • However, when Taylor discussed the origins of Mormonism in 1863, he did so without alluding to the canonical First Vision story,
  • "How did this state of things called Mormonism originate? We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view. He was surrounded with light and glory while the heavenly messenger communicated these things unto him, after a series of visitations and communications from the Apostle Peter and others who held the authority of the holy Priesthood, not only on the earth formerly but in the heavens afterwards." Journal of Discourses 10: 123@ 127
  •  Violates Wikipedia: No Original Research off-site— Do not use unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position.
    Violated by John "Foxe" —Diff: off-site
    Is the use of the word "however" supposed to imply that Taylor had forgotten about the First Vision by 1863? Recall that we just learned that he wrote about it in detail a pamphlet in 1850. The wiki editor relies on a primary source (Taylor's 1863 discourse) to create a new "fact" in the wiki article which implies that Taylor felt that the First Vision was of little importance.
  •  References not included in the Wikipedia article
    John Taylor references to the First Vision between 1863 and 1877:
  • 1876: "When God selected Joseph Smith to open up the last dispensation, which is called the dispensation of the fullness of times, the Father and the Son appeared to him, arrayed in glory..."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 18:325-326; 329, 330.
  • 1877: "the heavenly messengers, even God himself, came to break the long, long silence of ages, revealing through his Son, Jesus Christ, and the holy angels, the everlasting Gospel?..."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 19:123.
  • 1877: "But when the Lord manifested himself to Joseph Smith, presenting to him his Son who was there also, saying, "This is my beloved Son, hear ye him;" he then knew that God lived;"
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 19:152.
  • and in 1879, he referred to Joseph Smith having asked "the angel" which of the sects was correct.
  • The actual "Mormon apologetic response" is addressed below and in the FAIR Wiki here: John Taylor's understanding of the First Vision.
  • The implication that John Taylor was confused as to the nature of the First Vision is unsupportable. There is a considerable amount of supporting primary source material that is hidden by the reference to the "Mormon apologetic response" in the wiki article. Any history professor with an interest in Mormonism would never have ignored so many easily accessible supporting references.
  • Another odd comment from John "Foxe":

"I accept that John Taylor mentioned the First Vision at least twice. That he did not emphasize it during his tenure as President is just as true as ever." John "Foxe" (21 October 2007) off-site

  •  References not included in the Wikipedia article
    The article only mentions one of John Taylor's 1879 talks which refer to the First Vision. This is a very common tactic of critics. Note that a second talk by Taylorgiven the very same day (March 2nd, 1879) as the one cited in the Wikipedia article states,

"When the Father and the Son and Moroni and others came to Joseph Smith..."
John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 20:257. (2 March 1879)

  • In addition to the clear reference made on the same day as the "angel" comment, there are additional missing references which show that Taylor clearly understood the nature of the First Vision and actively talked of it—as one can clearly see from the following citations, any attempt to imply that Taylor didn't know about the First Vision or emphasize it is absurd:
  • 25 February 1879: "God Himself, accompanied by the Savior, appeared to Joseph...."
    John Taylor letter to A. K. Thurber at Richfield, Utah (25 February 1879).
  • 28 November 1879: "He came himself, accompanied by his Son Jesus, to the Prophet Joseph Smith."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 21:116.
  • 7 December 1879: "...the Lord revealed himself to him together with his Son Jesus, and, pointing to the latter, said: "This is my beloved Son, hear him."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 21:161.
  • 4 January 1880: "...the Lord appeared unto Joseph Smith, both the Father and the Son, the Father pointing to the Son said "this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 21:65.
  • 27 June 1881: "And hence when the heavens were opened and the Father and Son appeared and revealed unto Joseph the principles of the Gospel..."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 22:218.
  • 28 August 1881: "...the Father and the Son appeared to the youth Joseph Smith to introduce the great work of the latter days."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 22:299.
  • 20 October 1881: "In the commencement of the work, the Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith. And when they appeared to him, the Father, pointing to the Son, said, "This is my beloved Son, hear him."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 26:106-107.
  • 1882: John Taylor, Mediation and Atonement (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret News Company, 1882; Photo lithographic reprint, Salt Lake City, 1964), 138.
  • 5 March 1882: "After the Lord had spoken to Joseph Smith, and Jesus had manifested himself to him..."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 23:32.
  • 29 May 1882: "God the Father, and God the Son, both appeared to him; and the Father, pointing, said, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him."
    John Taylor, Millennial Star 44 no. 22 (29 May 1882), 337–338. (emphasis added)
  • 23 November 1882: "It is true that God appeared to Joseph Smith, and that His Son Jesus did;"
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 23:322.
  • 18 May 1884: "When our Heavenly Father appeared unto Joseph Smith, the Prophet, He pointed to the Savior who was with him, (and who, it is said, is the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of His person) and said: "This is my beloved Son, hear Him."
    John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 25:177-178.
  • 1892: "God revealed Himself, as also the Lord Jesus Christ, unto His servant the Prophet Joseph Smith, when the Father pointed to the Son and said: ‘This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye Him.’"
    John Taylor, cited in B. H. Roberts, Life of John Taylor (1989; 1st published 1892), 394.
  • Three non-Mormon students of Mormonism, Douglas Davies, Kurt Widmer, and Jan Shipps agree that the LDS emphasis on the First Vision was a "'late development', only gaining an influential status in LDS self-reflection late in the nineteenth century."
  • "Historians have pondered the various phrases of this vision's evolution and tend to see its present form as a 'late development,' only gaining an influential status in LDS self-reflection late in the nineteenth century." Douglas J. Davies, An Introduction to Mormonism (Cambridge University Press, 2003), 136; Kurt Widner, Mormonism and the Nature of God: A Theological Evolution, 1833-1915 (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2000), 92-107; Jan Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition (Urbana: University of Illinois, 1985), 30-32. Nevertheless, LDS apologists assert that the doctrine played a significant part in new religion by the time of Smith's martyrdom www.fairwiki.org - historical timeline of First Vision presentation
  •  Violates Wikipedia: No Original Research off-site— Do not use unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position.
    Violated by John "Foxe" —Diff: off-site
    Note the reference in the footnote to "LDS apologists" asserting that the "doctrine" of the First Vision played a "significant part in [the] new religion." This is incorrect. The event called the "First Vision" is being conflated with "doctrine" by the wiki editor. The FAIR Wiki article referenced does not make any claims regarding the influence of the First Vision on the formation of doctrine, nor does it make any claims regarding whether or not it played a "significant part in [the] new religion." The article is designed to respond specifically to the critical claim that the First Vision was seldom mentioned in Latter-day Saint publications during the early years of the Church, and the critical assertion that members were not familiar with the event. The article does, in fact, state in the conclusion that Church members became aware of the First Vision "by reading LDS books, LDS newspapers, LDS pamphlets, and LDS educational primers."
  • The actual title of the FAIR Wiki article referenced is "Seldom mentioned in LDS publications before 1877?."
  • Mormon historian James B. Allen also argues that the First Vision "did not figure prominently in any evangelistic endeavors by the Church until the 1880s."
  • Allen, 43-69, summarized in Kurt Widner, Mormonism and the Nature of God: A Theological Evolution, 1833-1915 (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2000), 103.
  • The first important visual representation of the First Vision was painted by the Danish convert C. C. A. Christensen sometime between 1869 and 1878, and George Manwaring, inspired by the artist, wrote a hymn about the First Vision (later renamed "Oh, How Lovely Was the Morning") first published in 1884.
  • Allen (1980) , p. 53-54.
  • The article points out that Manwaring published his song Joseph's first prayer in 1884. That is not so: it was written in 1878, and published then and at least 3 more times before becoming part of the hymnal.
  • Kurt Widner states that it was primarily through "the post 1883 sermons of LDS Apostle George Q. Cannon that the modern interpretation and significance of the First Vision in Mormonism began to take shape."
  • Kurt Widner, Mormonism and the Nature of God: A Theological Evolution, 1833-1915 (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2000), 93; Journal of Discourses, 24: 340-41, 371-72. "The emergence of the First Vision is a syncretic approach to deal with past doctrinal inconsistencies on a broad scale. What it attempts to do is, in one giant sweep, gather all of the doctrinal inconsistencies, such as a plurality of Gods, God being an exalted man, the purpose of the Church, and the calling of Joseph Smith, and place it into an earlier time frame." Widner, 105.
  • This assumes, of course, that we ignore the repeated references to the event in conference talks by John Taylor between 1876 and 1883.
  • As the sympathetic but non-Mormon historian Jan Shipps has written, "When the first generation of leadership died off, leaving the community to be guided mainly by men who had not known Joseph, the First Vision emerged as a symbol that could keep the slain Mormon leader at center stage."
  • Jan Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition (Urbana: University of Illinois, 1985), 32.
  • Only in Wikipedia is it necessary for Jan Shipps to be qualified as a "sympathetic but non-Mormon" historian!
  • The centennial anniversary of the vision in 1920 "was a far cry from the almost total lack of reference to it just fifty years before."
  • Allen (1980) , p. 57: "The Mutual Improvement Associations issued a special commemorative pamphlet, the vision was memorialized in music, verse and dramatic representations, and the church's official publication, the Improvement Era, devoted almost the entire April issue to that event."
  • By 1939, even George D. Pyper, an LDS Sunday School superintendent and manager of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, found it "surprising that none of the first song writers wrote intimately of the first vision."
  • George D. Pyper, Stories of Latter-day Saint Hymns: Their Authors and Composers (Salt Lake City: Deseret Press, 1939), 34. Pyper noted that Parley Pratt's earlier "An Angel from on High" and "Hark Ye Mortals" "referred to Cumorah and the Book of Mormon" rather than to the First Vision.
  • Why is the surprise expressed by Pyper, quoted in the wiki article, worthy of note? the First Vision had been published dozens and dozens of times by many many members of the church, prior to the penning of Manwaring's song. If it had not been widely spoken of, there would have been no context in which Manwaring could have written the song. Manwaring didn't popularize the first vision; he merely put it into poetic form.
  • Bitton (1994) , p. 86as quoted inAnderson (1996)
  • After plural marriage ended at the turn of the 20th century, the First Vision was promoted heavily by Joseph F. Smith, and it soon replaced polygamy in the minds of adherents as the main defining element of Mormonism and the source of the faith's perception of persecution by outsiders.
  • Flake (2004) , pp. 120-21.
  • As a result, belief in the First Vision is now considered fundamental to the faith, second in importance only to belief in the divinity of Jesus.
  • Allen (1966) , p. 29.
  • An official website of the Church calls the First Vision "the greatest event in world history since the birth, ministry, and resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Our entire case as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rests on the validity of this glorious First Vision. It was the parting of the curtain to open this, the dispensation of the fullness of times. Nothing on which we base our doctrine, nothing we teach, nothing we live by is of greater importance than this initial declaration. I submit that if Joseph Smith talked with God the Father and His Beloved Son, then all else of which he spoke is true. This is the hinge on which turns the gate that leads to the path of salvation and eternal life.

  • Gordon B. HinkleyNovember, (1998), "What Are People Asking about Us?", Ensign .
  •  Correct, per cited sources
  • In 1961 Hinckley went even further, "Either Joseph Smith talked with the Father and the Son or he did not. If he did not, we are engaged in a blasphemy."
  • 'Improvement Era (December 1961), 907. David O. McKay, the ninth president of the LDS Church, also declared the First Vision to be the foundation of the faith. David O. McKay, Gospel Ideals (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1951), 19.
  • In 1961, Gordon B. Hinckley "went even further" than he did 37 years later in 1998?
  • Note that the wiki editor considers Hinckley's statements regarding the First Vision to be a "boon to us non-Mormons since he's willing to bet the farm on a date that creates all sorts of problems for apologists." (John "Foxe," 29 September 2007) off-site
  • This quote was used in order to include the word "blasphemy" as a preface to what comes later.

Likewise, in a January 2007 interview conducted for the PBS documentary "The Mormons," Hinckley said of the First Vision, "[I]t's either true or false. If it's false, we're engaged in a great fraud. If it's true, it's the most important thing in the world....That's our claim. That's where we stand, and that's where we fall, if we fall. But we don't. We just stand secure in that faith."

  •  Citation abuse— The meaning of a source quotation has been altered, or the source used does not support the author's conclusion.
    Violated by John "Foxe" —Diff: off-site
    The wiki author makes Hinckley's quote sound like it is only referring to the First Vision by omitting mention of Moroni, the Book of Mormon and priesthood restoration.
  • Gordon B. Hinckley's statement without omissions. He is talking about more than just the First Vision:

Well, it's either true or false. If it's false, we're engaged in a great fraud. If it's true, it's the most important thing in the world. Now, that's the whole picture. It is either right or wrong, true or false, fraudulent or true. And that's exactly where we stand, with a conviction in our hearts that it is true: that Joseph went into the [Sacred] Grove; that he saw the Father and the Son; that he talked with them; that Moroni came; that the Book of Mormon was translated from the plates; that the priesthood was restored by those who held it anciently. That's our claim. That's where we stand, and that's where we fall, if we fall. But we don't. We just stand secure in that faith.

According to the LDS church the vision teaches that God the Father and Jesus Christ are separate beings with glorified bodies of flesh and bone; that mankind was literally created in the image of God; that Satan is real but God infinitely greater; that God hears and answers prayer; that no other contemporary church had the fullness of Christ's gospel; and that revelation has not ceased. In the twenty-first century, the Vision features prominently in the Church's program of proselytism.

  • Kurt Widmer, Mormonism and the Nature of God: A Theological Evolution, 1833-1915 (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2000), 92.
  • Note the deliberate counterpoint between the use of the words "blasphemy" and "great fraud" in the previous statements by Gordon B. Hinckley with a list of beliefs that evangelical Christians consider blasphemous. Is there any doubt as to which audience this wiki article is targeted?

Perspectives within the Community of Christ (Section Version 1/2/2010)

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–Community_of_Christ Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion

William B. Smith, a younger brother of Joseph Smith, Jr., and a key figure in the early Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS, renamed Community of Christ in 2001) gave several accounts of the First Vision, although in 1883 he stated that a "more elaborate and accurate description of his vision" was to be found in Joseph Smith's own history

  • William Smith, "On Mormonism," in Vogel, EMD, 1:496.
  •  Correct, per cited sources

REMAINDER OF SECTION SKIPPED - NOT RELEVANT

The Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite)

Skipped

Church of Christ (Temple Lot)

Skipped

Academic interpretations

Alleged chronological problems (Section Version 1/2/2010)

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–Alleged_chronological_problems Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion

Writing of the revivals described in the canonized First Vision story (which has been canonized by the LDS Church), Milton V. Backman, Jr., associate professor of history and religion at Brigham Young University, said that although "the tools of the historian" could neither verify nor challenge the First Vision, "records of the past can be examined to determine the reliability of Joseph's description regarding the historical setting."

  • Backman (1969) , p. 2
  •  Violates Wikipedia: No Original Research off-site— Do not use unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position.
    Violated by 74s181 —Diff: off-site
    The 1838 account never mentions "revivals." It does mention "an unusual excitement on the subject of religion."

Grant Palmer and others claim that there are serious discrepancies between the various accounts, as well as anachronisms revealed by lack of contemporary corroboration.

  • The best recent skeptical summary of the First Vision stories is Grant Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), 235-54. Palmer, a retired paid LDS religious instructor was disfellowshipped by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints after publishing this book. Palmer concludes his chapter, "The 1832 account describes Joseph's experience most accurately. Smith's 1832 description does not forbid him from joining a church, nor does it mention a revival or persecution. Instead, he became convicted of his sins from reading the scriptures and received forgiveness from the Savior in a personal epiphany. He stated that his call to God's work came in 1823 from an angel, later identified as Moroni. When a crisis developed around the Book of Mormon in 1838, he conflated several events into one. Now he was called by God the Father and Jesus Christ in 1820 during an extended revival, was forbidden to join any existing church, and was greatly persecuted by institutions and individuals for sharing his vision of God. This version is not supported by historical evidence."(253-54)
  •  References not included in the Wikipedia article
    Once again, Joseph's 1835 account is ignored. From Joseph's 1835 diary:

a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame which was spread all around, and yet nothing consumed, another personage soon appeard like unto the first, he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee, he testified unto me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; and I saw many angels in this vision I was about 14 years old when I received this first communication;
—Diary of Joseph Smith, Jr. (1835-1836)

  •  A wiki editor's opinion is presented as fact— The wiki editor has placed his own opinion in the article as if it were fact.
    Violated by John "Foxe" —Diff: off-site
    The wiki editor inserts his own opinion into the article as fact by calling Palmer's view of the First Vision "the best recent skeptical summary." There a many who would disagree with that assessment.
  • See "A FAIR Analysis of An Insider's View of Mormon Origins"

For instance, in the canonized account, Smith said that when he shared his vision with a Methodist minister, the latter treated his "communication not only lightly, but with great contempt, saying it was all of the devil, that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days." Smith said that he became the "subject of great persecution, which continued to increase."

  • "I was greatly surprised at his behavior; he treated my communication not only lightly, but with great contempt, saying it was all of the devil, that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days; that all such things had ceased with the apostles, and that there would never be any more of them. I soon found, however, that my telling the story had excited a great deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was the cause of great persecution, which continued to increase."Smith (1842c) , p. 748

But according to emeritus Brigham Young University history professor James B. Allen, there is no evidence beyond Smith's word that he ever mentioned his vision to a minister—or in fact, to anyone else—for years after the event is supposed to have occurred. Nor is there any evidence that the young Smith was persecuted for telling the First Vision story during the 1820s.

  • "The fact that none of the available contemporary writings about Joseph Smith in the 1830’s, none of the publications of the Church in that decade, and no contemporary journal or correspondence yet discovered mentions the story of the first vision is convincing evidence that at best it received only limited circulation in those early days.” James B. Allen, “The Significance of Joseph Smith's First Vision in Mormon Thought,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 1 (Autumn 1966). In No Man Knows My History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), the skeptical Fawn Brodie is more biting: "Joseph's first published autobiographical sketch of 1834, already noted, contained no whisper of an event that, if it had happened, would have been the most soul-shattering experience of his whole youth." (24) "If something happened that spring morning in 1820, it passed totally unnoticed in Joseph's home town, and apparently did not even fix itself in the minds of members of his own family." (25)
  •  Violates Wikipedia: Citing sources off-site— There is either no citation to support the statement or the citation given is incorrect.
    Violated by John Foxe —Diff: off-site
    The wiki editor is using Allen, by name, to support the assertion that "there is no evidence beyond Smith's word that he ever mentioned his vision to a minister," yet Allen actually says that it "received limited circulation." Allen does not express an opinion Joseph's conversation with the minister. He certainly does not state that there is no evidence that Joseph ever mentioned his vision to a minister. This is blatant abuse of the citation.
  •  Violates Wikipedia: Neutral Point-of-View off-site— All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources.
    Violated by John Foxe —Diff: off-site
    The use of the phrases "there is no evidence" and "nor is there any evidence" is intended to lead the reader to the conclusion that evidence does not exist. It would be more correct to say that there is no known evidence.

Discrepancies cited by critics (Section Version 1/2/2010)

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–Alleged_chronological_problems Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion
  • Critics of the First Vision cite the multiple versions of the First Vision as evidence that it may have been fabricated by Smith
  • Tanner, Jerald and Sandra (1987 (5th ed)), Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? {{{pages}}}
Critics specifically identify the following discrepancies between the various versions:
  • Abanes, Richard (2002), One Nation Under Gods {{{pages}}}
See also: A Fair Analysis of One Nation Under Gods
  • Was Smith 14 or 15 at the time of the vision?
  • Did Smith attend a contemporaneous religious revival?
  • Did the supernatural personages tell Smith his sins were forgiven?
  • Were the supernatural personages angels, Jesus, God or some combination?
  • Did the vision declare all contemporary churches (or specifically the Methodist church) corrupt, or did Smith believe this to be true before he experienced the vision?

Joseph Smith's Accounts (Section Version 1.2.2010)

- Source of First Vision Supernatural beings Messages from beings Notes A FAIR Opinion
1832 Joseph Smith's own handwriting from his Letterbook The Papers of Joseph Smith, v1, p5-7, Dean Jessee (ed.), Deseret Book Company 1989.Jessee, Dean (1989), The Papers of Joseph Smith: Autobiographical and Historical Writings {{{pages}}}</ref> And Early Mormon Documents, v 1, p27-29, Dan Vogel, Signature Books, 1996. "The Lord" "Thy sins are fogiven thee". Smith decides for himself that all churches are corrupt. Vision in Smith's "16th year" (i.e. when he is 15 years old). All other accounts state his age as 14.
1835, Nov. 9 - Joseph Smith diary (Ohio Journal, handwritten, Warren Parrish scribe) The Papers of Joseph Smith, Dean Jessee (ed.), v2, p68-69. Deseret Book Company 1989. Two unidentified personages, and "many angels" "Thy sins are fogiven thee" and Jesus is the "son of God" No message of revivals or corrupt churches.
1835, Nov. 14 - Joseph Smith diary (Ohio Journal, handwritten, Warren Parrish scribe) The Papers of Joseph Smith, Dean Jessee (ed.), v2, p79. Deseret Book Company 1989. "visitation of angels" None. No mention of revival, or sins forgiven, or corrupt churches.
1838/1839 - History of the Church, Early Draft (James Mulholland Scribe) Two personages appear, and one says "This is my beloved Son, hear him". The personages tell Smith that all churches are corrupt. No mention of "sins forgiven". A revival is mentioned.
1842, March - Times and Seasons March 1, 1842, v3 no 9, p706-707. Two personages appear, and one says "This is my beloved Son, hear him". The personages tell Smith that all churches are corrupt. No mention of "sins forgiven". A revival is mentioned.
1842, March - Times and Seasons March 15, 1842, v3 no 11, p727-728, April 1, 1842, v3, no 11, p748-749. This version was later incorporated into The History of the Church, and later into the Pearl of Great Priceand thus is sometimes refered to as the "canonized version". Two personages appear, and one says "This is my beloved Son, hear him". The personages tell Smith that all churches are corrupt. No mention of "sins forgiven". A revival is mentioned. When this version was incorporated into the History of the Church, it was put into a context that suggests it was composed in 1838, but 1842 is the first known publication of this version.
1843, July - Letter from JS to D. Rupp An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States, Daniel Rupp, Philadelpha, 1844. p404-410. Two personages appear. No mention of "this is my son". The personages tell Smith that all churches are corrupt. No mention of "sins forgiven". No revival mentioned. Available online here. See also the Wentworth letter.
1843, Aug 29 - Interview with journalist David White Reprinted in Jessee v1 p443-444. Two personages appear. "Behold my beloved son, hear him". The personages tell Smith that all churches are corrupt. Revival is mentioned. No mention of "sins forgiven".

Accounts of Others (Section Version 1.2.2010)

- Source of First Vision Supernatural beings Messages from beings Notes A FAIR Opinion
1840, September - Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions , Orson Pratt, Ballantyne and Huges publ, 1840 (reprinted in Jessee, v1 p 149-160). Two unidentified "glorious personages, who exactly resembed each other in their features". "his sins were forgiven". The personages tell Smith that all churches are corrupt. This is the first published version. No mention of revival. Online here.
1841, June - A Cry from the Wilderness , Orson Hyde, published in German, Frankfurt, 1842 (reprinted in Jessee, v1 p405-409). Two unidentified "glorious personages" who resembed "each other in their features". No specific message. No mention of "sins forgiven" or revival. Smith determines for himself that all churches are corrupt.
1844, May 24 - as told to Alexander Neibaur Alexander Neibaur Journal, reprinted in Jessee, v1, p 459-461. Two personages appear. One has a "light complexion" and "blue eyes". "This is my beloved son harken ye him". Methodist churches are wrong. All churches are corrupt. Revival is mentioned. No mention of "sins forgiven".

Apologetic Responses (Section Version 1/2/2010)

Although this section is titled "Apologetic Responses," we see no apologists quoted here. We see Church leaders, a BYU professor, and an evangelical theologian. It is inaccurate to classify any and all believers as "apologists."

- Wikipedia Main Article: First Vision–Apologetic_Responses Wikipedia Footnotes: First Vision–Notes A FAIR Opinion

Leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have acknowledged that the differences in the accounts "constitute stumbling blocks for many." Apostle Neal A. Maxwell wrote:

In our own time, Joseph Smith, the First Vision, and the Book of Mormon constitute stumbling blocks for many—around which they cannot get—unless they are meek enough to examine all the evidence at hand, not being exclusionary as a result of accumulated attitudes in a secular society. Humbleness of mind is the initiator of expansiveness of mind."

  • Neal A. Maxwell, Meek and Lowly (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1987), 76).
  •  Violates Wikipedia: No Original Research off-site— Do not use unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position.
    Violated by John Foxe —Diff: off-site
    Elder Maxwell nowhere states that the First Vision is a "stumbling block" because of "differences in the accounts." He speaks of "Joseph Smith, the First Vision, and the Book of Mormon" as "stumbling blocks" to certain people.
  • The various accounts of the First Vision are addressed in the January 1985 Ensign. The article is by Milton V. Backman, Jr.: Joseph Smith’s Recitals of the First Vision. The article discusses the 1832, 1835, 1838 and 1842 accounts. Backman states,

In an important way, the existence of these different accounts helps support the integrity of the Latter-day Saint Prophet. It indicates that Joseph did not deliberately create a memorized version which he related to everyone. In the legal profession, attorneys and judges recognize that if a witness repeats an incident by using precisely the same language, the court might challenge the validity of such a statement.

Some believers view differences in the accounts as overstated. Richard L. Anderson, a professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University wrote, "What are the main problems of interpreting so many accounts? The first problem is the interpreter. One person perceives harmony and interconnections while another overstates differences."

  • "One person perceives harmony and interconnections while another overstates differences. Think of how you retell a vivid event in your life—marriage, first day on the job, or an automobile accident. A record of all your comments would include short and long versions, along with many bits and pieces. Only by blending these glimpses can an outsider reconstruct what originally happened. The biggest trap is comparing description in one report with silence in another. By assuming that what is not said is not known, some come up with arbitrary theories of an evolution in the Prophet’s story. Yet we often omit parts of an episode because of the chance of the moment, not having time to tell everything, or deliberately stressing only a part of the original event in a particular situation. This means that any First Vision account contains some fraction of the whole experience. Combining all reliable reports will recreate the basics of Joseph Smith’s quest and conversation with the Father and Son."Anderson (1996)
  •  Correct, per cited sources

Other believers view the differences in the accounts as reflective of Smith's increase in maturity and knowledge over time. In a recent PBS interview, Marlin K. Jensen, General authority and Church Historian said:

I've actually studied the various accounts of Joseph's First Vision, and I'm struck by the difference in his recountings. But as I look back at my missionary journals, for instance, which I've kept and other journals which I've kept throughout my life, I'm struck now in my older years by the evolution and hopefully the progression that's taken place in my own life and how differently now from this perspective I view some things that happened in my younger years.
  •  Correct, per cited sources

In another interview on the same PBS documentary, Richard Mouw, an evangelical theologian and student of Mormonism summarized his feelings about the First Vision in this way:

My instinct is to attribute a sincerity to Joseph Smith. And yet at the same time, as an evangelical Christian, I do not believe that the members of the godhead really appeared to him and told him that he should start on a mission of, among other things, denouncing the kinds of things that I believe as a Presbyterian. I can't believe that. And yet at the same time, I really don't believe that he was simply making up a story that he knew to be false in order to manipulate people and to gain power over a religious movement. And so I live with the mystery.
  •  Correct, per cited sources

References

Wikipedia references for "First Vision"
  • Abanes, Richard, (2002), One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church , New York: Four Walls Eight Windows .
  • Allen, James B., (1980), Emergence of a Fundamental: The Expanding Role of Joseph Smith's First Vision in Mormon Religious Thought off-site .
  • Allen, James B., (1966), The Significance of Joseph Smith's First Vision in Mormon Thought off-site .
  • Anderson, Richard Lloyd, Joseph Smith’s Testimony of the First Vision off-site .
  • Anderson, Richard Lloyd, (1969), Circumstantial Confirmation Of the first Vision Through Reminiscences off-site .
  • Backman, Milton V., Jr., (1969), Awakenings in the Burned-over District: New Light on the Historical Setting of the first Vision off-site .
  • Berge, Dale L., Archaeological Work at the Smith Log House off-site .
  • Bauder, Peter, Vogel, Dan (editor) (1834), Early Mormon Documents , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Bitton, Davis, (1994), Historical Dictionary of Mormonism , Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press .
  • Brown, Matthew B., Historical or Hysterical— Anti-Mormons and Documentary Sources Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research off-site .
  • Bushman, Richard Lyman, (2005), Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling , New York: Knopf .
  • Cowdery, Oliver, Far West Record: Minutes of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1830–1844 , Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company .
  • Cowdery, Oliver, (1834), Letter III off-site .
  • Cowdery, Oliver, (1835), Letter IV off-site .
  • Flake, Kathleen, (2004), The Politics of American Religious Identity: The Seating of Senator Reed Smoot, Mormon Apostle University of North Carolina Press .
  • Hill, Marvin S., (1980), The First Vision Controversy: A Critique and Reconciliation .
  • Howard, Richard P., (1980), Joseph Smith's First Vision: The RLDS Tradition off-site .
  • Howe, Eber Dudley, ed., The Mormon Creed off-site .
  • Jessee, Dean (1989), The Papers of Joseph Smith: Autobiographical and Historical Writings {{{pages}}}
  • Jessee, Dean C., (Spring, 1971), How Lovely was the Morning off-site .
  • Jessee, Dean C., (1969), Early Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision .
  • Mormon History off-site .
  • Mack, Solomon, (1811), A Narraitve [sic] of the Life of Solomon Mack Windsor: Solomon Mack off-site .
  • Matzko, John A., (2007), The Encounter of the Young Joseph Smith with Presbyterianism .
  • McKune, Joshua, Review of Mormonism: Rejoiner to Elder Cadwell off-site .
  • Neibaur, Alexander, (1841–48), Journal of Alexander Neibaur off-site .
  • Palmer, Grant H., (2002), An Insider's View of Mormon Origins Signature Books .
  • Phelps, W.W., ed., (1833), A Book of Commandments, for the Government of the Church of Christ , Zion: William Wines Phelps & Co. off-site .
  • Porter, Larry C., (1969), Reverend George Lane—Good "Gifts", Much "Grace", and Marked "Usefulness" off-site .
  • Pratt, Orson, (1840), A Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions, and of the Late Discovery of Ancient American Records , Edinburgh: Ballantyne and Hughes off-site .
  • Quinn, D. Michael, (1998), Early Mormonism and the Magic World View Signature Books .
  • Ray, Craig N., (2002), Joseph Smith's History Confirmed Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research off-site .
  • Riley, I. Woodbridge, (1903), The Founder of Mormonism: A Psychological Study of Joseph Smith, Jr. , New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. off-site
  • Roberts, B. H. (editor) (1902), History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints LDS Church off-site .
  • Smith, Joseph, Jr., Jessee, Dean C (editor) (1832), Personal Writings of Joseph Smith , Salt Lake City: Deseret Book off-site .
  • Smith, Joseph, Jr., Jessee, Dean C (editor) (1835), Personal Writings of Joseph Smith , Salt Lake City: Deseret Book off-site .
  • Smith, Joseph, Jr., (1838), History of the Church , copied to Jessee, Dean C (editor) (1839–1843), Personal Writings of Joseph Smith Deseret Book .
  • Smith, Joseph, Jr., (1842a), Church History [Wentworth Letter] off-site .
  • Smith, Joseph, Jr., (1842b), History of Joseph Smith off-site .
  • Smith, Joseph, Jr., (1842c), History of Joseph Smith off-site .
  • Smith, Lucy Mack, (1853), Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet, and His Progenitors for Many Generations , Liverpool: S.W. Richards off-site .
  • Smith, William, (1883), William Smith on Mormonism: A True Account of the Origin of the Book of Mormon , Lamoni, Iowa: RLDS Church off-site .
  • Smith, William, (1884), The Old Soldier's Testimony off-site .
  • Tanner, Jerald and Sandra (1987 (5th ed)), Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? {{{pages}}}
  • Taylor, John, How a Knowledge of God is Obtained—The Gospel to the Dead—Various Dispensations of the Most High to Mankind—Power of the Priesthood—Restoration of the Gospel Through Joseph Smith—Failings of the Saints—Corruptions of the Wicked off-site .
  • Tucker, Pomeroy, (1867), Origin, Rise and Progress of Mormonism , New York: D. Appleton off-site .
  • Turner, Orasmus, (1851), History of the Pioneer Settlement of Phelps and Gorham's Purchase, and Morris' Reserve , Rochester, New York: William Alling off-site .
  • Vogel, Dan (editor) (1996), Early Mormon Documents , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Vogel, Dan (editor) (1999), Early Mormon Documents , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Vogel, Dan (editor) (2000), Early Mormon Documents , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Vogel, Dan (editor) (2002), Early Mormon Documents , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Vogel, Dan (editor) (2003), Early Mormon Documents , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Vogel, Dan, (2004), Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet , Salt Lake City: Signature Books .
  • Waite, David Nye, Sr., The Prairies, Nauvoo, Joseph Smith, the Temple, the Mormons &c off-site .

Further reading

Mormonism and Wikipedia



<onlyinclude>


FairMormon's approach to Wikipedia articles

FairMormon regularly receives queries about specific LDS-themed Wikipedia articles with requests that we somehow "fix" them. Although some individual members of FAIR may choose to edit Wikipedia articles, FairMormon as an organization does not. Controversial Wikipedia articles require constant maintenance and a significant amount of time. We prefer instead to respond to claims in the FAIR Wiki rather than fight the ongoing battle that LDS Wikipedia articles sometimes invite. From FAIR’s perspective, assertions made in LDS-themed Wikipedia articles are therefore treated just like any other critical (or, if one prefers, "anti-Mormon") work. As those articles are revised and updated, we will periodically update our reviews to match.

Who can edit Wikipedia articles?

Editors who wish to participate in editing LDS-themed Wikipedia articles can access the project page here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement. You are not required to be LDS in order to participate—there are a number of good non-LDS editors who have made valuable contributions to these articles.

Recommendations when editing Wikipedia articles

FAIR does not advocate removing any references from Wikipedia articles. The best approach to editing Wikipedia is to locate solid references to back up your position and add them rather than attempting to remove information. Individuals who intend to edit should be aware that posting information related to the real-world identities of Wikipedia editors will result in their being banned from editing Wikipedia. Attacking editors and attempting to "out" them on Wikipedia is considered very bad form. The best approach is to treat all Wikipedia editors, whether or not you agree or disagree with their approach, with respect and civility. An argumentative approach is not constructive to achieving a positive result, and will simply result in what is called an "edit war." Unfortunately, not all Wikipedia editors exhibit good faith toward other editors (see, for example, the comment above from "Duke53" or comments within these reviews made by John Foxe's sockpuppet "Hi540," both of whom repeatedly mocked LDS beliefs and LDS editors prior to their being banned.)

Do LDS editors control Wikipedia?

Although there exist editors on Wikipedia who openly declare their affiliation with the Church, they do not control Wikipedia. Ironically, some critics of the Church periodically falsely accuse Wikipedia editors of being LDS simply because they do not accept the critics' desired spin on a particular article.

Do "anti-Mormons" control Wikipedia?

Again, the answer is no. The truth is that Wikipedia is generally self-policing. Highly contentious articles do tend to draw the most passionate supporters and critics.

Why do certain LDS articles seem to be so negative?

Although some LDS-related Wikipedia articles may appear to have a negative tone, they are in reality quite a bit more balanced than certain critical works such as One Nation Under Gods. Although many critical editors often accuse LDS-related Wikipedia articles of being "faith promoting" or claim that they are just an extension of the Sunday School manual, this is rarely the case. Few, if any, Latter-day Saints would find Wikipedia articles to be "faith promoting." Generally, the believers think that the articles are too negative and the critics believe that the articles are too positive. LDS Wikipedia articles should be informative without being overtly faith promoting. However, most of the primary sources, including the words of Joseph Smith himself, are "faith promoting." This presents a dilemma for Wikipedia editors who want to remain neutral. The unfortunate consequence is that Joseph's words are rewritten and intermixed with contradictory sources, resulting in boring and confusing prose.

FairMormon's analysis of LDS-related Wikipedia articles

We examine selected Wikipedia articles and examine them on a "claim-by-claim" basis, with links to responses in the FairMormon Answers Wiki. Wikipedia articles are constantly evolving. As a result, the analysis of each article will be updated periodically in order to bring it more into line with the current version of the article. The latest revision date may be viewed at the top of each individual section. The process by which Wikipedia articles are reviewed is the following:

  1. Update each Wikipedia passage and its associated footnotes.
  2. Examine the use of sources and determine whether or not the passage accurately represents the source used.
  3. Provide links to response articles within the FairMormon Answers Wiki.
  4. If violation of Wikipedia rules is discovered, identify which Wikipedia editor (by pseudonym) made the edit, provide a description of the rule violated and a link to the Wikipedia "diff" showing the actual edit.
  5. If a violated rule is later corrected in a subsequent revision, the violation is removed and a notation is added that the passage is correct per cited sources. This doesn't mean that FAIR necessarily agrees with the passage—only that it is correct based upon the source used.

Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, "Mormonism and Wikipedia: The Church History That “Anyone Can Edit”"

Roger Nicholson,  Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, (2012)

The ability to quickly and easily access literature critical of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been made significantly easier through the advent of the Internet. One of the primary sites that dominates search engine results is Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia that “anyone can edit.” Wikipedia contains a large number of articles related to Mormonism that are edited by believers, critics, and neutral parties. The reliability of information regarding the Church and its history is subject to the biases of the editors who choose to modify those articles. Even if a wiki article is thoroughly sourced, editors sometimes employ source material in a manner that supports their bias. This essay explores the dynamics behind the creation of Wikipedia articles about the Church, the role that believers and critics play in that process, and the reliability of the information produced in the resulting wiki articles.

Click here to view the complete article

Wikipedia and anti-Mormon literature
Key sources
  • Roger Nicholson, "Mormonism and Wikipedia: The Church History That 'Anyone Can Edit'," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 1/8 (14 September 2012). [151–190] link
Wiki links
Online
Navigators

</noinclude>


Copyright © 2005–2024 FAIR. This is not an official Web site of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The content of this page may not be copied, published, or redistributed without the prior written consent of FAIR.
We welcome your suggestions for improving the content of this FAIR Wiki article.

Sites we recommend:


Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=Mormonism_and_Wikipedia/First_Vision/Interpretations_and_responses_to_the_vision&oldid=56979"