Joseph Smith's Four Accounts of the First Vision

[The Nehor]

He took offense, said he would have to pray about it, because he felt he was inspired to say those things. He further claimed that "one of us has the Spirit, I don't know which one it is, but I'm going to pray and find out. Until then, I am not teaching anymore."

Is it wrong that while reading this I thought, "And now everyone is a winner."

[stn9]

I can't stand manuals and ignore most of what they say. I do follow the scriptures or topic assigned though. Ideally we wouldn't need manuals and teachers would teach by the Spirit using the scriptures.

Don't you know how dangerous such thinking is?

Don't you know the Brethren direct the work of creating manuals?

Don't you know the purity of...

Oh, wait. I partially agree.

But I can stand them and do go through it quickly to see what principles they've extracted from the text to be covered. And on occassion they contain a really good quote I'll use.

[The Nehor]

Don't you know how dangerous such thinking is?

Don't you know the Brethren direct the work of creating manuals?

Don't you know the purity of...

Oh, wait. I partially agree.

But I can stand them and do go through it quickly to see what principles they've extracted from the text to be covered. And on occassion they contain a really good quote I'll use.

I do read them, partially because I think I'm the only human on the Earth whose Patriarchal Blessing commands him to read the manuals when he teaches.......incidentally this proves to me that God knew very well what would become of that child who used to be terrified of speaking before large groups when he grew up.

If such thinking is dangerous then I'm finally edgy again. Hooray.

[stn9]

That's really in your PB? That proves God has a sense of humor. "And tell the Nehor to use the manuals when he teaches. Yeah, that'll be funny 'cuz he's gunna grow up to hate them. Let's see how he handles that one."

[The Nehor]

That's really in your PB? That proves God has a sense of humor. "And tell the Nehor to use the manuals when he teaches. Yeah, that'll be funny 'cuz he's gunna grow up to hate them. Let's see how he handles that one."

Yes, it's really there. That's okay. God still hasn't found the dead fish I put in his desk right before I left Premortality so we'll call it even.

[stn9]

Um, hate to ruin the fun, but he knew about the fish in the drawer before you ever thought of it, before you were even a twinkle in his eye. He's just humoring you.

[The Nehor]

Um, hate to ruin the fun, but he knew about the fish in the drawer before you ever thought of it, before you were even a twinkle in his eye. He's just humoring you.

Yes, but I don't know that......

[consiglieri]

â??Teachers would be well advised to

study carefully the scriptures and their manuals before reaching out for supplemental materials. Far too many teachers seem to stray from the approved curriculum materials without fully reviewing them

.

zerinus

Thanks for the quote,

Zerinus

!

Inasmuch as I have, in fact, studied the scriptures as well as the manual carefully, I consider this the

green light

to reach out for supplemental materials.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[bluebell]

Thanks for the quote, Zerinus!

Inasmuch as I have, in fact, studied the scriptures as well as the manual carefully, I consider this the green light to reach out for supplemental materials.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

If the Spirit has told you as much, then i completely agree, it's a green light to do so.

If the Spirit hasn't, then no matter how thoroughly you have studied the scriptures/manual, supplemental materials will not be the right choice.

[Mudcat]

As I stated, by referring to the word 'lord' twice JS may have implied two personages but because of his audience he did not say it clearly. The protestant pastors would have been aggrieved with anyone who claimed two distinct personages. For many, Jesus and Heavenly Father were one and the same.

Protestants believe in three persons and one God. I don't think any protestant would take issue with the fact the Christ and the Father are two persons. However, you might be more correct in saying Protestants would have gotten a little bent out of shape at the concept of the Father having a body.

Regardless, the argument that JS hid some of the details earlier in his life is very speculative, that is unless you know of some journal entry or some such that he made that states this as his intent.

The only observable fact is that the accounts were different in several ways and consistent in others.

As a side note, there seems to be a lot of web pages on the differences in the accounts.

Is anyone aware of a site that displays the consistencies within the accounts as well?

[emeliza]

Also, both visions were known by early members and no problem developed. It could be JS explained the difference to the satisfaction of all. But we have no record of it. But we also have no record of problems developing because of it.

Actually I think problems did arise and that is why the below was done.

  1 Owing to the many reports which have been put in circulation by evil-disposed and designing persons, in relation to the rise and progress of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, all of which have been designed by the authors thereof to militate against its character as a Church and its progress in the worldâ??I have been induced to write this history, to disabuse the public mind, and put all inquirers after truth in possession of the facts, as they have transpired, in relation both to myself and the Church, so far as I have such facts in my possession.
  2 In this history I shall present the various events in relation to this Church, in truth and righteousness, as they have transpired, or as they at present exist, being now [1838] the eighth year since the organization of the said Church.

[cdowis]

He took offense, said he would have to pray about it, because he felt he was inspired to say those things.

I find it interesting that the Spirit would guide him to disobey the counsel and specific instructions of the General Authorities. He is walking down the path of apostacy.

[zerinus]

Hrm. Do you think I was saying that they are? But since the Brethren don't teach Sunday School classes, where and when do they have the opportunity to teach the membership? I don't care what label you want to place on it: general conferences and stake conferences and CES firesides and mission conferences are all occasions at which the general authorities teach. What manuals do they use for that?

Teaching that is done in a â??classroomâ? setting is different from one that is done in sermon or a talk. You too have the opportunity to â??teachâ? in the same way that the General Authorities teach at General Conference, when you are invited to give a Sacrament talk. Then you have the freedom to choose your sources from where you like. But teaching a class is a different ball game.

I almost expressed this idea in my last post. Indeed, the scriptures are the things we are to teach. So, would you go so far as to say that anything in the scriptures is then fair game for inclusion in a lesson?

All teaching (and preaching) in the Church is to be done by the power of the Holy Ghost; and â??if ye receive not the Spirit, ye shall not teachâ? (D&C 42:14).

zerinus

[Hermes]

I find it interesting that the Spirit would guide him to disobey the counsel and specific instructions of the General Authorities. He is walking down the path of apostacy.

like obiwan before you, i remind you to avoid personal attacks/accusations such as this one. if anything it makes many people a little worried about you rather than he!~hermes

[emeliza]

like obiwan before you, i remind you to avoid personal attacks/accusations such as this one. if anything it makes many people a little worried about you rather than he!~hermes

Does it matter if cdowis is talking about the guy in littlechild's story, not a poster or Consig? Or are we just suppose to stray from saying something about apostasy related to people in general?

[stn9]

Teaching that is done in a "classroom" setting is different from one that is done in sermon or a talk. You too have the opportunity to "teach" in the same way that the General Authorities teach at General Conference, when you are invited to give a Sacrament talk. Then you have the freedom to choose your sources from where you like. But teaching a class is a different ball game.

So, what in your mind differentiates teaching a "classroom" setting from teaching in a "talk" setting? Is it the expectation that members are expected to respond to and discuss what has been said by the teacher? If so, what of Q&A periods with a general authority, such as a mission or stake conference or other training meeting? Is that a "classroom" setting in your mind? Are they then under the same limits that a Sunday School teacher is under?

I can't believe that God would, solely on the basis of setting, rule out of bounds in Sunday School a quote from the Journal of Discourses but ok that same quote for sacrament meeting talks. I agree that the same quote might appropriate in a given setting and not in another, as directed by the Spirit of course, but not that the Spirit couldn't allow a Journal of Discourses quote to be read just because the clock has progressed a few minutes into the future and two prayers have occurred. Instead, I would argue, the Spirit could just as easily direct that the Journal of Discourses quote not be shared in sacrament (given the more general and youthful audience) but should be in Sunday School; or even that the quote should not be shared in either setting, or even that it should never be shared.

In other words, I refuse to accept the notion that God has in heaven a list of approved sources divided by setting--one list of things He would be pleased to hear in "talks" and another list of things He would be pleased to hear in "lessons," and anything not on the list for the corresponding setting is eternally out of bounds.

All teaching (and preaching) in the Church is to be done by the power of the Holy Ghost; and "if ye receive not the Spirit, ye shall not teach" (D&C 42:14).

Well, I know that all teaching is supposed to be done by the Spirit, but that does not directly address the question of the source materials that should be allowed in a lesson. A lesson from a manual can be taught with or without the Spirit, just as sources other than the scriptures and the manual can be used with or without the Spirit. I even think non-scripture and non-manual sources can stand approved in the sight of God completely separate from scriptures or manuals.

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm joining this thread late and haven't read through the other posts. I'll just add my contribution for what it's worth.

As a gospel doctrine teacher in our ward, I will be teaching this lesson on Sunday. As I've pondered the matter, I've determined I will say something in passing to the class along the lines of the following:

In your personal study, you might run across, if you have not done so already, separate accounts by Joseph Smith of the First Vision. While these different versions do not conflict with one another, some contain elements that others do not; some differ from others in their focus. Do not let this bother you. It should not seem strange, when you reflect on your own experience in sharing momentous or noteworthy events in your own life. Depending on time, setting, listeners, purpose and other factors, your account might vary a bit from one telling to the next. Yet each version is still a true account of your experience. A retelling later in life may actually be better than earlier ones, because you've had time to reflect on it and analyze it in the context of what you have learned or experienced in the intervening years. Such is undoubtedly the case with Joseph's retelling of the First Vision

I emphasize that the 1838 account by Joseph Smith, the one that appears as Joseph Smith â?? History in the Pearl of Great Price, is the official account in the Church. There is good reason why the Lord inspires his servants to include in the scriptural canon the content that is therein. By virtue of its inclusion in the canon, the 1838 Joseph Smith account is to be regarded by us as authoritative and thus more reliable than any other rendition.

[Helorum]

Is anyone aware of a site that displays the consistencies within the accounts . . . ?

No, but a chart showing the consistencies will be published in a book this April.

In the 1832 version, JS's audience was quite different from the 1838 account

This is not accurate. Both accounts are included in official histories of the restoration. The 1832 account was simply not published.

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

Why not? If a source is not credible it should not be utilized as if it were.

[deadeye]

It seems that church-published magazine are approved for supplementing lesson material, but is there any limit on how far back you should go? IE should you only use magazines published within the past year, five years? Technically, the Journal of Discourses is a church-published magazine, but it's doubtful that many of the sermons condemning the evils of monogamy and touting the benefits of polygamy would be too helpful in a modern Gospel Doctrine discussion. I believe some of the Ensign articles published in the 1960s might also be damaging (ie urging Priesthood holders to avoid getting blood transfusions from black people to avoid losing the Priesthood).

[The Nehor]

You can get offended by stuff from the 70's. When I was in England I got a copy of the Millenial Star from that era with an article for women entitled, "You could be Lovelier" and it had grooming tips. I wonder how long that apartment had been in the Mission. I found Ensigns from the 80's and this.....scary.....

[Mudcat]

Hi Helorum,

No, but a chart showing the consistencies will be published in a book this April.

Do you know which accounts they will be using to base their comparison on?

Why not? If a source is not credible it should not be utilized as if it were.

Ok, seems like you want to discuss credibility. You initial statement was that some of the references from the list I posted did not reference the first vision. I suppose I took your statement as 'matter of fact' and didn't want to discuss it further, thus my statement in regards to credibility.

However, since we are on the topic, why do you feel they don't reference the first vision? Granted some of the information is indirect, but indirect doesn't mean they are non-relative to it.

Mudcat

[stn9]

As to a "harmony" between the accounts, zernius posted a great link early on in the thread and mentioned it just a bit later: http://www.eldenwatson.net/harmony.htm

It's Watson's attempt to construct a comprehensive view of the First Vision based on both the commonalities between and the unique elements of the various accounts. I don't recall, having reviewed it quite awhile ago, whether it addresses discrepancies (apparent or actual).

[annewandering]

I do read them, partially because I think I'm the only human on the Earth whose Patriarchal Blessing commands him to read the manuals when he teaches.......incidentally this proves to me that God knew very well what would become of that child who used to be terrified of speaking before large groups when he grew up.

If such thinking is dangerous then I'm finally edgy again. Hooray.

lol and He knew you didnt like manuals but needed to use them? He is so smart isnt he.

[consiglieri]

Grab the popcorn and dim lights.

It's spooky story time.

But strangely, enough, this spooky story relates to the First Vision.

______________

Back in the spring of 1978, I was not a Mormon, but had a good friend through high school who was.

It was my senior year, and one Saturday night, I went over to my friend's house to hang out. This was in Bonney Lake, Washington.

A bunch of stuff was going on at his house that we weren't interested in, so we ended up going out on his second story deck, and from there up onto the roof by way of the picnic table.

The talk turned to things of a religious nature, and my friend started telling me about the premortal existence and the grand council in heaven. It was a beautiful night and the stars were out. I felt something in my heart really neat about what my friend was saying, never having heard anything like it before. It is hard to describe what I felt, but it seemed to make the stars shine brighter, and make the top of his roof into a sacred space.

We were sitting toward the side of the roof where some evergreen trees grew up and above the roof-line, sillouetted against the starry sky.

Just then, there was a loud cracking sound, like the snapping of a branch, that came from a few feet away within the shadowy branches of the evergreen tree. It startled me and I swore. Suddenly the good feeling I had was replaced by a bad feeling. I thought that was a strange reaction to have to something like the snapping of a branch. Then it occurred to me that twenty-feet up in an evergreen tree was a strange place to have a branch snap in the middle of the night.

Concerning me more was the fact that my friend seemed weirded out by it, too, and we agreed to get down off the roof and go inside, where we continued our conversation. But the good feeling I was experiencing was gone for the night.

__________________

A few weeks later, I was baptized on June 22, 1978.

__________________

A number of months after that, I went to the stake center where they were having some kind of open house, as part of which they were showing the Church movie, "Joseph Smith's First Vision," with Stewart Peterson, over in one corner of the gym.

I watched young Joseph go to the grove, and get down on his knees to pray. Suddenly he hears a branch snapping and jumps up on his feet to look around. Seeing nothing, he gets back on his knees when he is overcome with darkness. Something doesn't want him to pray.

I confess to getting a chill when I saw this scene, because it was so reminiscent of what had happened on the roof of my friend's house. I was also a bit confused, because I had read the official First Vision account in the PGP numerous times, and didn't remember anything like that detail.

It was not until a number of years later, after getting back from my mission to Japan, that I discovered this detail is in the 1835 account, where Joseph mentions hearing the sound of somebody walking toward him, but nobody being there when he looked.

____________________

Because of this, I have a particular connection to this detail of the 1835 account, which in turn makes me see other details in Joseph Smith's non-official accounts as of peculiar interest and potential value.

And yes, I plan on sharing this in Gospel Doctrine class.

I was wondering if anybody else has a similar experience, or any other kind of experience by means of which they personally relate to some or other detail in the First Vision accounts.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Jeff K.]

It is a good story. By story I do not mean to indicate the question of veracity rather it would play a part in the lesson flow.