Joseph Smith's Four Accounts of the First Vision

[consiglieri]

So, consig, what did you mean by asking how far is too far?

My question was a bit tongue-in-cheek, I confess, figuring that pretty much everybody on the board would be familiar with the hay critics of the Church have made of the various accounts, the relatively recently discovered 1832 account in particular.

My goal is to be truthful but not hurtful; to first and above all do no harm.

But I feel it my duty to balance that goal with talking to my class like adults, and not engaging in any "sugar-coating." (I must permit myself a sly wink to Emeliza on this one. )

As far as "inspiring" the class, I pretty much leave that up to the Lord.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[stn9]

Don't forget the 1844 Neibaur diary! (Neibaur apparently moved to England sometime between 1828 and 1833, where he lived until 1841 when he and his family moved to Nauvoo. By the time he wrote the 1844 diary entry in question he had lived and worked amongst an English-speaking population for somewhere between 11 and 16 years.)

[Helorum]

I pasted this list from www.irr.

Some of the entries are not even about the First Vision.

Not much credibility.

[consiglieri]

Don't forget the 1844 Neibaur diary! (Neibaur apparently moved to England sometime between 1828 and 1833, where he lived until 1841 when he and his family moved to Nauvoo. By the time he wrote the 1844 diary entry in question he had lived and worked amongst an English-speaking population for somewhere between 11 and 16 years.)

Thanks to this thread, I will make a special point of mentioning Neibaur in Gospel Doctrine class.

I think there are many interesting things we can learn about Joseph Smith's first vision by considering details provided in versions other than the official.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[zerinus]

Okay, I'm back with resources in hand!

I have spent about an hour making this post, and warn you at the outset that it is somewhat detailed.

On the other hand, I think there is at least one new insight contained in it that tends to "gel" the different accounts of the First Vision given by Joseph Smith.

* * *

I hope that my analyzing it here may be of interest.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Thank you, that was interesting. But I would like to know what general conclusion do you intend to draw from that? Does it make the First Vision more likely to have happened or less likely? Does it cast doubt on its truth, makes it more certain, in your opinion?

zerinus

[PrettyNewMommy]

The debate would be over why it happened, not that it did happen. As for the whitewashing, I think you must be relatively new to religion in general. I grew up Presbyterian. We didn't talk about anything really that Calvin or Knox had done. In fact we barely brought them up at all even though their intrepretations were what we ended up following. Generally speaking we just stuck with the scriptures and creeds, but we never spoke of how the creeds came about. I never thought of it as whitewashing and I still don't. They focused on the gospel. Why should the CoJCoLDS be any different.

Not new to religion. Assume again..Sigh

We ARE different from other churches.-People are quick to say our church is the only "True" church..different from all else. But we are quick to throw it in the "Just like every other church group"..when it seems convenient. Convenience....Where to start with that.

Who cares, Consig..Just go by the book..Give them what they want people to hear..Just the one version of the vision-You don't want to loose your teaching position/or get dirty looks for going "too far", the other ones don't really matter and in 100 years no one will even know that there was more than one anyway. Best of luck.

[Lamanite]

Like my friend stn9, I have to respectfully disagree with Brother Jessee. I think Jessee's adding a bit a color to his narrative that isn't really justified by the actual diary entries. Idiosyncratic spellings and punctuation were common even among native English speakers in those days (see, notably, Joseph Knight's Recollection of Early Mormon History).

Well Stn9 and Nevo are a couple of ninnies!

Nevo: Well, who is your lord?

Lamanite: I don't have a lord, but I do have Dean Jessee!

Nevo: What?

Dennis: I told you, we're an anarcho-syndicist commune, we take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. But when in doubt, we always defer to Dean Jessee!

Sorry guys, that's all I could come up with.

Except for the question of what source material did Jessee read that made him make that statement? I doubt he would have just inferred such a thing. I don't know, but your arguments are compelling and logical.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[annewandering]

I guess technically we could say every time he discussed the first vision it was different. I can not say repeat the same talk in church without saying something different, or changing to the level to the audience, or adding a better scripture I found later, or taking out something that I could say better a different way etc etc etc........

What we need to remember is that the views are not contrary or opposing to each view they are the same context.

oh I dont see inconsistancies at all. The 11 are recorded (written) instances of his accounts of the vision, not all by him but timely.

[annewandering]

I pasted this list from www.irr.org/mit/first-vision/fvision-accounts.html

Alexander Neibaur in his diary is the 11th.

[emeliza]

But I feel it my duty to balance that goal with talking to my class like adults, and not engaging in any "sugar-coating." (I must permit myself a sly wink to Emeliza on this one. )

--Consiglieri

Cute.

You definitely need to let us know how it goes. I think I need to read over the lesson myself and take some notes on this thread. Hopefully our lesson will be good, but I also know that the teacher is the same women I have got in trouble with for not conforming enough so who knows.

Lamanite~ I want to hear how yours is taken by the youth as well. I am sure most of them know quite a bit of this, but teenagers usually have good interpretations and insights.

[Obiwan]

What trouble did you cause when you were the GD teacher?

I would like to know so I can hopefully avoid any such pitfalls.

The trouble such as in you saying your personal views as you do here, but in Church instead, which ARE NOT in conformity to Church teaching and history. That's what you need to look out for. And given your views of some "other" issues related to the Church that you've expressed on this forum, I would recommend you stay away from essentially any controversial topic in Church, because you can't seem to be in the flow of the mainstream, and thus such would cause problems.

[annewandering]

Thanks to this thread, I will make a special point of mentioning Neibaur in Gospel Doctrine class.

I think there are many interesting things we can learn about Joseph Smith's first vision by considering details provided in versions other than the official.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

He was a rather interesting man in his own right. The diary entry was much like the rest of his diary. Much too brief but very much to the point.

[Mudcat]

Some of the entries are not even about the First Vision.

Not much credibility.

Hi Helorum,

Thanks for the criticism. Sorry the list I Googled up, was unhelpful.

I certainly don't want to get in a discussion about the credibility of the sources.

Somebody asked for a list, so I found one and posted it.

If you have a more accurate list please feel free to post it.

I'll make sure to examine it very closely and see if it meets my approval.

Mudcat

[The Nehor]

Too much emphasis on what is interesting and what information we can teach for my taste. When I go to Sunday School I want the Spirit to bear witness of what is being taught. I want powerful testimony borne and I want to hear about applicability. When I teach I want my class to be able to participate by sharing insights and asking questions about the most important elements of the Gospel.

What is being discussed seems appropriate for an Institute or Seminary class or a discussion with friends outside of Church but I suspect only a minority of any given Sunday School class is interested in the things being talked about here. I read this counsel from Elder Holland when I'm having trouble with teaching:

"In all of this we must remember that the Lord has never given more emphatic counsel to the Church than that we are to teach the gospel "by the Spirit, even the Comforter which was sent forth to teach the truth."

Do we teach the gospel "by the Spirit of truth?" He has inquired. Or do we teach it "some other way? And if it be by some other way," He warns, "it is not of God." In language echoing other commandments, He has said, "If ye receive not the Spirit ye shall not teach."

No eternal learning can take place without that quickening of the Spirit from heaven. So, parents, teachers, and leaders, we must face our tasks the way Moses faced the promised land. Knowing he could not succeed any other way, Moses said to Jehovah, "If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence."

That is what our members really want when they gather in a meeting or come into a classroom anyway. Most people don't come to church looking merely for a few new gospel facts or to see old friends, though all of that is important. They come seeking a spiritual experience. They want peace. They want their faith fortified and their hope renewed. They want, in short, to be nourished by the good word of God, to be strengthened by the powers of heaven. Those of us who are called upon to speak or teach or lead have an obligation to help provide that, as best we possibly can. We can only do that if we ourselves are striving to know God, if we ourselves are continually seeking the light of His Only Begotten Son. Then, if our hearts are right, if we are as clean as we can be, if we have prayed and wept and prepared and worried until we don't know what more we can do, God can say to us as He did to Alma and the sons of Mosiah: "Lift up thy head and rejoice. ... I will give unto you success."

[stn9]

Too much emphasis on what is interesting and what information we can teach for my taste. When I go to Sunday School I want the Spirit to bear witness of what is being taught. I want powerful testimony borne and I want to hear about applicability....

My spiritual witness is enriched by studying these things more in-depth; the collected accounts point to many doctrines of the gospel evidenced in the event that might otherwise go unnoticed or unsupported. I, for instance, in studying the accounts find precious (to me) links and insight into a psalm, a story in Matthew and in Luke, the initiatory and endowment, Moroni's first visit, and even Hebrew and Greek exegesis, not to mention the identity of God. I can't believe I would be in the minority in this regard; most latter-day saints could stand to have their testimony deepened a little more by better knowledge and understanding.

[The Nehor]

My spiritual witness is enriched by studying these things more in-depth; the collected accounts point to many doctrines of the gospel evidenced in the event that might otherwise go unnoticed or unsupported. I, for instance, in studying the accounts find precious (to me) links and insight into a psalm, a story in Matthew and in Luke, the initiatory and endowment, Moroni's first visit, and even Hebrew and Greek exegesis, not to mention the identity of God. I can't believe I would be in the minority in this regard; most latter-day saints could stand to have their testimony deepened a little more by better knowledge and understanding.

So is mine. However, I've found that I'm usually in the minority. One of the ways God reveals himself to me is through studying esoteric things but I'm now convinced that most people's path to salvation is not on this road. I used to teach all kinds of esoteric stuff when I taught until a friend came up to me and told me most of the members weren't interested. I (luckily) knew this friend well enough to know she would never say something like this to hurt me but figured she was wrong. Next time I taught I focused more on what people seemed to be interested in discussing and realized that what I thought was most interesting was the time the room went silent and no one had anything to say and led to a lot of glazed eyes.

I prayed about it and decided to overhaul my teaching style. Now not often (but often enough) after a lesson someone will come to me with tears in their eyes and thank me for helping them get some insight into a problem they were facing or for the Spirit they felt. I also found God directing much more of what I said. I just don't see how presenting a comprehensive overview of the differences among First Vision accounts can lead to the kinds of insights suffering people need to help them grow or overcome some difficulty when the time could be devoted to teaching about the nature of God, his love for Joseph and all of us, and the glorious restoration.

I also note that while I've enjoyed lessons about more academic topics like the comparison, I rarely leave them with newfound spiritual strength or a resolution to change my life in accordance with revelation I received.

[consiglieri]

Thank you, that was interesting. But I would like to know what general conclusion do you intend to draw from that? Does it make the First Vision more likely to have happened or less likely? Does it cast doubt on its truth, makes it more certain, in your opinion?

zerinus

Looking at this as a detective, and understanding from the outset that detectives are prone to see variations in the same story as evidence of dissembling, I should think that my analysis speaks for itself.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

Who cares, Consig..Just go by the book..Give them what they want people to hear..Just the one version of the vision-You don't want to loose your teaching position/or get dirty looks for going "too far", the other ones don't really matter and in 100 years no one will even know that there was more than one anyway. Best of luck.

In my relatively uneducated ward, I find the membership more open to hearing new things than in wards where there is a generally higher level of education.

What I am interested in knowing from you, PrettyNewMommy, is whether the adjective "pretty" is meant to modify "new" or "mommy."

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[stn9]

...I just don't see how presenting a comprehensive overview of the differences among First Vision accounts can lead to the kinds of insights suffering people need to help them grow or overcome some difficulty when the time could be devoted to teaching about the nature of God, his love for Joseph and all of us, and the glorious restoration.

I agree wholeheartedly. I do think, though, that pulling some details from the accounts can lead to just such spiritual experiences as you described while also presenting the idea of different accounts to those who had never even thought of such a thing. Most will never look them up or ask anything again; but if they are ever confronted by the issue directly or indirectly from the critics point of view, perhaps they can say, "Hey, my SS teacher talked about that once and mentioned they actually stregthened his testimony. Maybe I [or you] could talk to him about that."

[The Nehor]

I agree wholeheartedly. I do think, though, that pulling some details from the accounts can lead to just such spiritual experiences as you described while also presenting the idea of different accounts to those who had never even thought of such a thing. Most will never look them up or ask anything again; but if they are ever confronted by the issue directly or indirectly from the critics point of view, perhaps they can say, "Hey, my SS teacher talked about that once and mentioned they actually stregthened his testimony. Maybe I [or you] could talk to him about that."

If you're talking about a passing mention then I see no problem with it and I don't think we disagree. If I were teaching this week (I'm not, we switch off every other week) then I would mention one passage from one of the other accounts that I think is very enlightening and helpful. Perhaps I misunderstood but this thread seemed to be advocating a break down of all the accounts and a compare/contrast done to look at them. This I would personally not do. It's the kind of thing I'm always tempted to do and keep having to tell myself to stop.

[stn9]

I interpreted "how far is too far" to be question about this very point: how much do you delve into the issue (different accounts or differences in the accounts, either way).

[consiglieri]

You definitely need to let us know how it goes. I think I need to read over the lesson myself and take some notes on this thread. Hopefully our lesson will be good, but I also know that the teacher is the same women I have got in trouble with for not conforming enough so who knows.

In that case, I am thinking maybe you should lie in wait in your class and, at an appropriate moment, raise your hand, blink those big, beautiful eyes of yours, and ask that tart of a teacher why she hasn't brought up Joseph Smith's earliest account in which he mentions only one Lord.

You may want to consider sitting by the exit.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "Putting the E in SSCE")

[emeliza]

In that case, I am thinking maybe you should lie in wait in your class and, at an appropriate moment, raise your hand, and ask that tart of a teacher why she hasn't brought up Joseph Smith's earliest account in which he mentions only one Lord.

You may want to consider sitting by the exit.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "Putting the E in SSCE")

We'll see. She is a good teacher, just very by the book, however also very by the spirit so I can't knock her teaching. We co-taught a lesson once and it was amazing.

[consiglieri]

We co-taught a lesson once and it was amazing.

I hope you didn't make faces when she wasn't looking.

[Lamanite]

I agree wholeheartedly. I do think, though, that pulling some details from the accounts can lead to just such spiritual experiences as you described while also presenting the idea of different accounts to those who had never even thought of such a thing. Most will never look them up or ask anything again; but if they are ever confronted by the issue directly or indirectly from the critics point of view, perhaps they can say, "Hey, my SS teacher talked about that once and mentioned they actually stregthened his testimony. Maybe I [or you] could talk to him about that."

I know when I studied the 1832 account for the first time. It really affected me for some reason when I learned that one of the Primary reasons Joseph went to the Lord, was not to see which Church was right, but how he could become "saved", in other words how to receive forgiveness. It touched me that the Lord called Joseph by name and told him his sins were forgiven (I'm paraphrasing). At that moment in my life I didn't need to hear God wax thick about the abominations of Church's, I needed to hear the personal journey and message of and to Joseph Smith.

Big UP!

Lamanite