In The Grove?

[inquiringmind]

I've been reading Joseph's account of the first vision, and I'm wondering why it's called a vision?

To me, the word implies something that's taking place in the mind (like a God-inspired dream, but not a real, bodily visitation.)

Were the Father and Jesus actually in the grove with Joseph, or did he just see a vision of them (perhaps patterned after artist's conceptions he'd seen of Jesus)?

Does Joseph's use of the word "vision" indicate he didn't believe they were really there, and did he ever clearly claim to have received a literal bodily visitation?

P.S. Do the prophecies of Joseph in the BOM make him "a prophet like unto Moses," and would that phrase indicate that he did actually see Jesus face to face?

I'm thinking of Numbers 12:6-8.

Hear now My words:

If there is a prophet among you,

I, the Lord, make Myself known to him iin a vision;

I speak to him in a dream.

Not so with My servant Moses;

He is faithful in all My house.

I speak with him face to face,

Even plainly, and not in dark sayings;

And he sees the form of the Lord. ..

Edited May 18, 2012 by inquiringmind

[Log]

This was discussed recently; they were not in the grove. It was a vision.

[inquiringmind]

This was discussed recently; they were not in the grove. It was a vision.

Where was this discussed?

Can you provide a link?

Did Jesus (and/or His Father) ever actually visit Joseph?

Did Jesus actually come to the Kirtland Temple, or was that a vision?

And doesn't it say somewhere in the BOM that the Joseph of the seed of Lehi would be a prophet "like unto Moses"?

What of Numbers 12:6-8?

Hear now My words:

If there is a prophet among you,

I, the Lord, make Myself known to him iin a vision;

I speak to him in a dream.

Not so with My servant Moses;

He is faithful in all My house.

I speak with him face to face,

Even plainly, and not in dark sayings;

And he sees the form of the Lord.

Edited May 18, 2012 by inquiringmind

[Kevin Christensen]

In the Wentworth Letter, Joseph expressly says, "I retired to a secret place in a grove and began to call upon the Lord, while fervently engaged in supplication my mind was taken away from the objects with which I was surrounded, and I was enwrapped in a heavenly vision..."

http://en.fairmormon.org/Primary_sources/Joseph_Smith,_Jr./First_Vision_accounts/1842_Wentworth_Letter_account%29

Also relevant, I think, is Harry Potter's King's Cross conversation with Dumbledore in HP7. If the source is divine, the change real, and the information valid, what difference does it make?

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[thesometimesaint]

Even today we say that an extra beautiful woman is a vision of loveliness. Few would doubt we're talking about a physically real live woman.

[inquiringmind]

If the source is divine, the change real, and the information valid, what difference does it make?

I'm not sure it would make a difference (in the sense I think you mean here), but if Jesus wasn't actually in the grove, or in the Kirtland Temple, and never actually spoke to Joseph face to face, He hasn't spoken to anybody in that way in over two thousand years.

[inquiringmind]

Even today we say that an extra beautiful woman is a vision of loveliness. Few would doubt we're talking about a physically real live woman.

There's a difference between seeing such a woman on T.V., and seeing her face to face in your living room.

If she actually knows you, and sent you a DVD, the message might be just as important either way (which I think is what Kevin was getting at), but there is a difference between seeing an electronically transmitted vision of a real live woman, and seeing her in person.

Did Joseph ever actually see Jesus in person (like Moses did)?

Edited May 18, 2012 by inquiringmind

[zerinus]

I've been reading Joseph's account of the first vision, and I'm wondering why it's called a vision?

To me, the word implies something that's taking place in the mind (like a God-inspired dream, but not a real, bodily visitation.)

Were the Father and Jesus actually in the grove with Joseph, or did he just see a vision of them (perhaps patterned after artist's conceptions he'd seen of Jesus)?

Does Joseph's use of the word "vision" indicate he didn't believe they were really there, and did he ever clearly claim to have received a literal bodily visitation?

P.S. Do the prophecies of Joseph in the BOM make him "a prophet like unto Moses," and would that phrase indicate that he did actually see Jesus face to face?

I'm thinking of Numbers 12:6-8.

Hear now My words:

If there is a prophet among you,

I, the Lord, make Myself known to him iin a vision;

I speak to him in a dream.

Not so with My servant Moses;

He is faithful in all My house.

I speak with him face to face,

Even plainly, and not in dark sayings;

And he sees the form of the Lord. ..

The word vision has several different meanings in scripture. It can mean just ordinary revelation. It can mean a dream. It cam mean an apparition. It can also just mean sight. I searched and found 158 occurances of the word vision in scripture, with many different meanings. Here is a list of the occurances if the word in the classic LDS scripture site, and here is a list of the word in the new LDS scripture site (I like the classic site better for doing searches). But within the context of the of the current thread, anything that is seen with the eye of the Spirit rather than the natural eyes is legitimately called a vision. After Moses had seen God in a great vision, he said this:

Moses 1:

11 But now mine own eyes have beheld God; but not my natural, but my spiritual eyes, for my natural eyes could not have beheld; for I should have withered and died in his presence; but his glory was upon me; and I beheld his face, for I was transfigured before him.

And in the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord has declared:

D&C 67:

10 And again, verily I say unto you that it is your privilege, and a promise I give unto you that have been ordained unto this ministry, that inasmuch as you strip yourselves from jealousies and fears, and humble yourselves before me, for ye are not sufficiently humble, the veil shall be rent and you shall see me and know that I am—not with the carnal neither natural mind, but with the spiritual.

11 For no man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God.

12 Neither can any natural man abide the presence of God, neither after the carnal mind.

13 Ye are not able to abide the presence of God now, neither the ministering of angels; wherefore, continue in patience until ye are perfected.

So any kind of "seeing" God can only be done spiritually, or by the spiritual eyes, not natural eyes, and that is what the scriptures call a "vision".

Edited May 18, 2012 by zerinus

[Cobalt-70]

Regarding the vision of Jesus in the Kirtland temple, I think it's important that D&C 110 says, "The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened." It was the "eyes of [their] understanding" that were opened, not necessarily their physical eyes. I think all the visions of Joseph Smith were probably with his "spiritual eyes," or some of them may have even been dreams. Three of the visions of Moroni in 1823, for example, took place in a bedroom in the middle of the night where his siblings were soundly sleeping. His first vision may have been a dream as well, given that when it was over and he "came to himself," he found himself lying on his back. Smith sometimes spoke of dreams and visions interchangeably. But at least some of his visions were waking visions, such as the visions in the Kirtland temple, and "the Vision" with Sidney Rigdon which became D&C 76.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[thesometimesaint]

inquiringmind:

I know the difference between TV, internet, flickers, live action plays, and real life. JS only had plays and real life. It is beyond reasonable to suppose he didn't also know the difference.

[CASteinman]

This was discussed recently; they were not in the grove. It was a vision.

While it was a vision, I don't see how anyone can determine that they were not there. Alternatively, I do not see how anyone can determine that if God speaks to a man "Face to face" that He is physically there either.

Last night I spoke to my wife face to face -- as a man speaks to his friend. We were not in the same room, same city or same state. We were practically not in the same country as I was in Texas and she was in California. (That's a joke... I say... that's a joke, son).

The only thing that I know of that actually sheds a light on these visitation events is an account where Joseph Smith, ever curious, looked up into the shaft of light that remained behind just after an angel appeared to him. Apparently putting his head into the shaft of light and looking up he was able to see things. To me that implies some sort of physics at work, but even then, I don't know what it could be or even what I am talking about.

Edited May 18, 2012 by CASteinman

[Freedom]

I have a vision of my children's bed room and it isn't pretty. Numbers was written thousands of years ago in a language that no longer exists, and the translation you supplied is a translation, using words that best represent the intended meaning. In our current doctrinal rendering, the word vision has a much broader definition. The same is true with words such as soul. In the new testament, it is often synonymous with spirit, but in modern scripture, soul is the union of the body and spirit. Semantics and the evolution of language.

[inquiringmind]

inquiringmind:

I know the difference between TV, internet, flickers, live action plays, and real life. JS only had plays and real life. It is beyond reasonable to suppose he didn't also know the difference.

inquiringmind:

I know the difference between TV, internet, flickers, live action plays, and real life. JS only had plays and real life. It is beyond reasonable to suppose he didn't also know the difference.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

I was comparing a vision to an electronically transmitted image (of someone who isn't really in your living room), and contrasting that with having the actual person there with you.

If the projected image were a hologram, you might not know the difference (unless you tried to reach out and touch them), but they still wouldn't be there in person.

From what's said in the standard works, it would seem that Joseph actually met John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John in person, but does anyone know if he ever actually saw Jesus in person?

Edited May 18, 2012 by inquiringmind

[Log]

To my knowledge, Joseph did not see Jesus in person.

This is because Jesus only manifests himself to the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Log

[theplains]

From what's said in the standard works, it would seem that Joseph actually met John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John in person, but does anyone know if he ever actually saw Jesus in person?

According to the church's history, he is said to have actually seen the light shining upon him and 2 heavenly personages

standing in the air above him. The supposed visit by Moroni followed a similar pattern. He too is said to have been standing

in the air.

Regards,

Jim

[zerinus]

Did Jesus (and/or His Father) ever actually visit Joseph?

Yes.

Did Jesus actually come to the Kirtland Temple, or was that a vision?

It was both.

And doesn't it say somewhere in the BOM that the Joseph of the seed of Lehi would be a prophet "like unto Moses"?

It says that he was of the seed of Joseph of Egypt; so in essence the answer to your question is Yes.

What of Numbers 12:6-8?

Hear now My words:

If there is a prophet among you,

I, the Lord, make Myself known to him iin a vision;

I speak to him in a dream.

Not so with My servant Moses;

He is faithful in all My house.

I speak with him face to face,

Even plainly, and not in dark sayings;

And he sees the form of the Lord.

Well observed.

I'm not sure it would make a difference (in the sense I think you mean here), but if Jesus wasn't actually in the grove, or in the Kirtland Temple, and never actually spoke to Joseph face to face, He hasn't spoken to anybody in that way in over two thousand years.

He was in the grove, as well as in the Kirtland Temple.

Did Joseph ever actually see Jesus in person (like Moses did)?

Yes.

From what's said in the standard works, it would seem that Joseph actually met John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John in person, but does anyone know if he ever actually saw Jesus in person?

He said that he did. That presumably means that he did. What else do you think it could mean?

To my knowledge, Joseph did not see Jesus in person.

This is because Jesus only manifests himself to the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Not true.

[Cobalt-70]

From what's said in the standard works, it would seem that Joseph actually met John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John in person, but does anyone know if he ever actually saw Jesus in person?

For Peter, James, and John, the D&C actually only says that Smith and Cowdery heard their "voice" (D&C 128:20) and ordained them to the apostleship (D&C 27:12). It doesn't say that they actually saw them (though to be fair, it doesn't specifically say that they didn't see them, either).

As to John the Baptist, Cowdery's 1834 account of this describes it as a vision ("we were wrapped in the vision of the Almighty" were his words). He says they saw and heard, and that they "must have bowed" (I don't know why he put it this way--it seems like he wasn't sure if he bowed). Cowdery also says that they received the Holy Priesthood (which, just as an aside, meant the Melchizedek priesthood, circa 1834) "under his hand." That doesn't quite explicitly say that John laid his hands upon them, but Smith's version written in 1838 does say that John "laid his hands upon us." I don't know to what extent someone can lay their hands on you in a vision, but it is hard to ignore Cowdery's statement that they were "wrapped in the vision" when this occurred.

[Log]

Not true.

You are free to believe what you want.

while in (the) attitude of calling upon the Lord (in the 16th year of my age) a piller of fire light above the brightness of the sun at noon day come down from above and rested upon me and I was filled with the spirit of god and the (Lord) opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord...

When it first came upon him, it produced a peculiar sensation throughout his whole system; and immediately, his mind was caught away, from the natural objects with which he was surrounded; and he was enwapped in a heavenly vision,

while fervently engaged in supplication my mind was taken away from the objects with which I was surrounded, and I was enwrapped in a heavenly vision

This suffices to prove my statement with respect to the First Vision. Now, for D&C 110:

2 We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber.

11 After this vision [of the Lord with his feet upon a paved work of pure gold] closed, the heavens were again opened unto us...

There was no paved golden breastwork, and Joseph explicitly says this was a vision - therefore, this was a visionary experience.

Thus, my statement and position appear sound and historically correct. There appears to be no historical evidence that Joseph ever claimed to have seen the Lord physically, but rather always in vision.

This is, again, because the Lord only manifests himself to the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Ghost; he does not visit them in his bodily person.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Log

[zerinus]

You are free to believe what you want.

This suffices to prove my statement with respect to the First Vision. Now, for D&C 110:

There was no paved golden breastwork, and Joseph explicitly says this was a vision - therefore, this was a visionary experience.

Thus, my statement and position appear sound and historically correct. There appears to be no historical evidence that Joseph ever claimed to have seen the Lord physically, but rather always in vision.

This is, again, because the Lord only manifests himself to the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Ghost; he does not visit them in his bodily person.

Still not true.

[inquiringmind]

This is, again, because the Lord only manifests himself to the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Ghost; he does not visit them in his bodily person.

But was Joseph a Gentile?

If he was of the seed of Joseph of Egypt, wasn't he an Israelite?

Still not true.

Could you please say more than that?

Why is Log wrong to say Joseph only saw Jesus in vision?

Where does it say he really saw Him face to face (in person)?

Edited May 19, 2012 by inquiringmind

[zerinus]

Could you please say more than that?

I already have.

Why is Log wrong to say Joseph only saw Jesus in vision?

He isn't wrong about that.

Where does it say he really saw Him face to face (in person)?

It amounts to the same thing.

[CASteinman]

To my knowledge, Joseph did not see Jesus in person. This is because Jesus only manifests himself to the Gentiles by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Joseph was of the house of Israel and also I don't know for sure that seeing God by the power of the Holy Ghost is the same as God not being there physically.

[volgadon]

I've been reading Joseph's account of the first vision, and I'm wondering why it's called a vision?

To me, the word implies something that's taking place in the mind (like a God-inspired dream, but not a real, bodily visitation.)

Were the Father and Jesus actually in the grove with Joseph, or did he just see a vision of them (perhaps patterned after artist's conceptions he'd seen of Jesus)?

Does Joseph's use of the word "vision" indicate he didn't believe they were really there, and did he ever clearly claim to have received a literal bodily visitation?

Funny, I've been working on a blog post relating to a similar idea. For the moment, suffice it to say that the idea here is not that they really weren't in the grove, but that Joseph percieved them supernaturally, beyond the faculty of his unaided, natural eyes.

[mfbukowski]

There's a difference between seeing such a woman on T.V., and seeing her face to face in your living room.

If she actually knows you, and sent you a DVD, the message might be just as important either way (which I think is what Kevin was getting at), but there is a difference between seeing an electronically transmitted vision of a real live woman, and seeing her in person.

Did Joseph ever actually see Jesus in person (like Moses did)?

It wasn't Skype- that much I can tell you for sure.

It makes no difference- every bit of reality you know about is "in your mind"- made by light waves hitting your retina which your brain composes into a picture and you call it "real"

What you are asking about is what was the source of the light waves, or other stimulation to Joseph's brain! Who knows? Why is it important? All that is important is whether or not you have a testimony that "Joseph saw God".

Your question is unanswerable- no one could possibly know except God himself. Ask him next time you see him

PS- same for Moses.

Edited May 19, 2012 by mfbukowski

[volgadon]

It makes no difference- every bit of reality you know about is "in your mind"- made by light waves hitting your retina which your brain composes into a picture and you call it "real"

I like the thought. I guess that "in your mind" is used to indicate an internal, rather than external origin.

Edited May 19, 2012 by volgadon