FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Array
A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão: diferenças entre revisões
(m) |
(m) |
||
| Linha 1: | Linha 1: | ||
{{ | {{artigos FairMormon direitos autorais}} | ||
{{ | {{título do recurso|As críticas da Primeira Visão}} | ||
{{ | {{resumo dos tópicos}} | ||
== == | == == | ||
{{ | {{tópicos rótulo}} | ||
<onlyinclude> | <onlyinclude> | ||
{{cabeçalho | {{cabeçalho | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão | ||
|assunto= | |assunto=As críticas da Primeira Visão | ||
|resumo= | |resumo= | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Accounts | ||
|assunto=Church discussion of the First Vision accounts | |assunto=Church discussion of the First Vision accounts | ||
|resumo=Has the Church hidden the various accounts of the First Vision over the years? | |resumo=Has the Church hidden the various accounts of the First Vision over the years? | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Accounts/1832 | ||
|assunto=1832 | |assunto=1832 | ||
|resumo=Critical analysis of Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account | |resumo=Critical analysis of Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Accounts/1835 | ||
|assunto=1835 | |assunto=1835 | ||
|resumo=Critical analysis of Joseph Smith's 1835 First Vision account | |resumo=Critical analysis of Joseph Smith's 1835 First Vision account | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Accounts/1838 | ||
|assunto=1838 | |assunto=1838 | ||
|resumo=Joseph Smith's 1838 First Vision account is analyzed by critics of the Church in order to use it to prove that the First Vision never occurred. A variety of critical arguments are raised based upon the words Joseph used to describe the events leading up to his First Vision. We examine here the introduction to Joseph's 1838 First Vision account, found in the Pearl of Great Price and separate facts from opinion. | |resumo=Joseph Smith's 1838 First Vision account is analyzed by critics of the Church in order to use it to prove that the First Vision never occurred. A variety of critical arguments are raised based upon the words Joseph used to describe the events leading up to his First Vision. We examine here the introduction to Joseph's 1838 First Vision account, found in the Pearl of Great Price and separate facts from opinion. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão/The first and second visitation of angels | ||
|assunto=Joseph Smith's first and second "visitation of angels" | |assunto=Joseph Smith's first and second "visitation of angels" | ||
|resumo=Joseph Smith referred to the what we now know of as the First Vision as the "first visitation of angels." He referred to Moroni's visit as "another vision of angels." | |resumo=Joseph Smith referred to the what we now know of as the First Vision as the "first visitation of angels." He referred to Moroni's visit as "another vision of angels." | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Accounts/1832/Different age provided | ||
|assunto=Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account states he was 15 years old rather than 14 | |assunto=Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account states he was 15 years old rather than 14 | ||
|resumo=In Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision recital he said that he was "in the 16th year of [his] age" when the manifestation took place but when he created the 1838 account he changed this information to say that he was "in [his] fifteenth year." | |resumo=In Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision recital he said that he was "in the 16th year of [his] age" when the manifestation took place but when he created the 1838 account he changed this information to say that he was "in [his] fifteenth year." | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Paul's accounts | ||
|assunto=Discrepancies in Paul's account of his vision | |assunto=Discrepancies in Paul's account of his vision | ||
|resumo=Paul the apostle gave more than one account of his vision of the resurrected Lord while on the road to Damascus. Like Joseph Smith's account of the First Vision, Paul's accounts differ in some details but agree in the overall message. | |resumo=Paul the apostle gave more than one account of his vision of the resurrected Lord while on the road to Damascus. Like Joseph Smith's account of the First Vision, Paul's accounts differ in some details but agree in the overall message. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts | ||
|assunto=Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts? | |assunto=Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts? | ||
|resumo=The Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts, while refusing to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision. | |resumo=The Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts, while refusing to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Doctrine and Covenants 84 says God not seen without priesthood | ||
|assunto=D&C:84 says God cannot be seen without priesthood | |assunto=D&C:84 says God cannot be seen without priesthood | ||
|resumo=Critics argue that Joseph Smith claimed that he saw God in 1820 and also claimed that he received the priesthood in 1829. But in a text which he produced in 1832 ({{S||DC|84|21-22}}) it is said that a person cannot see God without holding the priesthood. Therefore, it is claimed that Joseph Smith contradicted himself and this counts as evidence against his calling as an authentic prophet of God. | |resumo=Critics argue that Joseph Smith claimed that he saw God in 1820 and also claimed that he received the priesthood in 1829. But in a text which he produced in 1832 ({{S||DC|84|21-22}}) it is said that a person cannot see God without holding the priesthood. Therefore, it is claimed that Joseph Smith contradicted himself and this counts as evidence against his calling as an authentic prophet of God. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/Were all the churches of the day claimed to be "an abomination" | ||
|assunto=Was Joseph Smith told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination?" | |assunto=Was Joseph Smith told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination?" | ||
|resumo=It is claimed that Joseph Smith stated that during the First Vision that he was told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination." | |resumo=It is claimed that Joseph Smith stated that during the First Vision that he was told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination." | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão/A "mormoninfographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account | ||
|assunto=A "mormoninfographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account. | |assunto=A "mormoninfographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account. | ||
|resumo=An anti-Mormon "infographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account, however, Joseph only refers to them as "personages." The link between the Father and the Son is only implied by the words spoken by the Father: "This is my beloved Son." | |resumo=An anti-Mormon "infographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account, however, Joseph only refers to them as "personages." The link between the Father and the Son is only implied by the words spoken by the Father: "This is my beloved Son." | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão/A "mormoninfographic" claims that "pillar of fire" not mentioned in 1832 account | ||
|assunto=A "mormoninfographic" states that "pillar of fire" is not mentioned in Joseph's 1832 account. | |assunto=A "mormoninfographic" states that "pillar of fire" is not mentioned in Joseph's 1832 account. | ||
|resumo=An anti-Mormon "infographic" claims that Joseph Smith's 1832 account neglects to mention a "pillar of fire." | |resumo=An anti-Mormon "infographic" claims that Joseph Smith's 1832 account neglects to mention a "pillar of fire." | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{resumo | {{resumo | ||
|link= | |link=A Primeira Visão/As críticas da Primeira Visão/A "mormoninfographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision | ||
|assunto=A "mormoninfographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision. | |assunto=A "mormoninfographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision. | ||
|resumo=An anti-Mormon "infographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision. This short summary account of the "first visitation of angels" was written in Joseph's journal only five days after he described seeing two "personages" and "many angels." | |resumo=An anti-Mormon "infographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision. This short summary account of the "first visitation of angels" was written in Joseph's journal only five days after he described seeing two "personages" and "many angels." | ||
Revisão das 16h30min de 13 de julho de 2014
As críticas da Primeira Visão
Esta página é um resumo ou índice. Informações mais detalhadas sobre este assunto está disponível no sub-páginas abaixo.
Tópicos
As críticas da Primeira Visão
Church discussion of the First Vision accounts
Resumo: Has the Church hidden the various accounts of the First Vision over the years?
1832
Resumo: Critical analysis of Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account
1835
Resumo: Critical analysis of Joseph Smith's 1835 First Vision account
1838
Resumo: Joseph Smith's 1838 First Vision account is analyzed by critics of the Church in order to use it to prove that the First Vision never occurred. A variety of critical arguments are raised based upon the words Joseph used to describe the events leading up to his First Vision. We examine here the introduction to Joseph's 1838 First Vision account, found in the Pearl of Great Price and separate facts from opinion.
Joseph Smith's first and second "visitation of angels"
Resumo: Joseph Smith referred to the what we now know of as the First Vision as the "first visitation of angels." He referred to Moroni's visit as "another vision of angels."
Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision account states he was 15 years old rather than 14
Resumo: In Joseph Smith's 1832 First Vision recital he said that he was "in the 16th year of [his] age" when the manifestation took place but when he created the 1838 account he changed this information to say that he was "in [his] fifteenth year."
Discrepancies in Paul's account of his vision
Resumo: Paul the apostle gave more than one account of his vision of the resurrected Lord while on the road to Damascus. Like Joseph Smith's account of the First Vision, Paul's accounts differ in some details but agree in the overall message.
Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts?
Resumo: The Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts, while refusing to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision.
D&C:84 says God cannot be seen without priesthood
Resumo: Critics argue that Joseph Smith claimed that he saw God in 1820 and also claimed that he received the priesthood in 1829. But in a text which he produced in 1832 (D&C 84:21-22) it is said that a person cannot see God without holding the priesthood. Therefore, it is claimed that Joseph Smith contradicted himself and this counts as evidence against his calling as an authentic prophet of God.
Was Joseph Smith told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination?"
Resumo: It is claimed that Joseph Smith stated that during the First Vision that he was told that "all the churches of the day were an abomination."
A "mormoninfographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account.
Resumo: An anti-Mormon "infographic" erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account, however, Joseph only refers to them as "personages." The link between the Father and the Son is only implied by the words spoken by the Father: "This is my beloved Son."
A "mormoninfographic" states that "pillar of fire" is not mentioned in Joseph's 1832 account.
Resumo: An anti-Mormon "infographic" claims that Joseph Smith's 1832 account neglects to mention a "pillar of fire."
A "mormoninfographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision.
Resumo: An anti-Mormon "infographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision. This short summary account of the "first visitation of angels" was written in Joseph's journal only five days after he described seeing two "personages" and "many angels."