Nature of Joseph Smith's First Vision

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Yes, but I could tell it was a dream. Dreaming of being touched and being touched aren't the same in terms of my experience.

So it doesn't correspond to reality right? 

I have had lucid dreams where I knew it was a dream and could still feel touch.  

https://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18100

 

Edited December 4, 2018 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

In a society that isn't practiced in the ideas of visions and second sight, it makes complete sense that based on your culture and time period that you would make assumptions like this.  

But in Joseph's day, his views were informed by his cultural upbringing and he was steeped a different way of viewing things.  Think of all the years that he envisioned treasures under the earth that he could see with second sight.  Lucy Mack Smith recalled that he would describe the Nephites and their very dress in great detail.  Think about how Joseph and Sidney received D&C 76 as a joint revelation where they both were seeing and describing what they saw and then the other person said they saw the same.  

Joseph's world was a very different one than the world we've grown up in. 

No, it is still around.

And it cannot be "the world" that was different it is the culture that is different.   Notice that by saying that you are saying there is no reality but your cultural reality.   My point exactly.  You are what you believe.

If you believe you can do things, you can- within limits of course, and we do make errors in perception.

[clarkgoble]

53 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

And it cannot be "the world" that was different it is the culture that is different.   Notice that by saying that you are saying there is no reality but your cultural reality.   My point exactly.  You are what you believe.

I think we actually mostly agree upon this. The difference is that I think how we analyze this and more importantly how we critique beliefs has to be tied to future not just present experience.

53 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

So it doesn't correspond to reality right?  

I have had lucid dreams where I knew it was a dream and could still feel touch.  

I'd say that or put more in the language you're comfortable with it doesn't predict future experience accurately.

If I experience something in a dream and expect it to continue and have others be aware of it the way other experiences go, I'll find myself surprised. Reality is that experience of the future.

BTW - you shouldn't need to do lucid dreaming to experience this. It's not hard with practice to be able to emulate any sense in ones creative imagination, not just voice which most are used to. However again, health mentally stable people are able to tell within the experience that it is ones imagination or a dream.

 

Edited December 4, 2018 by clarkgoble

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

No, it is still around.

And it cannot be "the world" that was different it is the culture that is different.   Notice that by saying that you are saying there is no reality but your cultural reality.   My point exactly.  You are what you believe.

If you believe you can do things, you can- within limits of course, and we do make errors in perception.

The culture was different (thats essentially what I was saying when I said "the world").  Anyway... 

As for doing things you believe in, I sort of agree.  But its also kind of like saying that if you believe in fairies and goblins then you will be able to see them, and if you don't believe then you can't, when in reality they don't exist and if you see them its because you have a vivid imagination.  You may also be in need of psychological help if you see fairies in the real world.  

 

[hope_for_things]

12 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

BTW - you shouldn't need to do lucid dreaming to experience this. It's not hard with practice to be able to emulate any sense in ones creative imagination, not just voice which most are used to. However again, health mentally stable people are able to tell within the experience that it is ones imagination or a dream.

I personally believe that this is exactly what Joseph was doing, i.e. practicing the creative imagination of second sight to see treasure, and later to see epic religious narratives playing out in an envisioned ancient America or later for John on the Island of Patmos, or Abraham, or even the entire bible.  He was imagining and re-imagining the past and putting it into a 19th century context.  

As for his mental stability, I think he was largely a believer of his own creative imaginations, but I think he had doubts at times, most likely his encounters with Isaac Hale and perhaps the trials on his treasure seeking as examples of him questioning and even considering reforming his practices, only later to have believers encourage him to continue doing these things clothed in the language of religion.  

Look also for the example of him traveling to Salem in the mid 1830s, thinking he could find treasure there.  I have a hard time believing that he would spend his time and efforts doing that, if he didn't in some sense believe in the veracity of his own creative revelation.  I think he was a believer most of the time, rather than a conscientious fraud.  

[mfbukowski]

58 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

If I experience something in a dream and expect it to continue and have others be aware of it the way other experiences go, I'll find myself surprised. Reality is that experience of the future.

 

Of course you would be surprised because that would be objective evidence of the "reality" of the dream and then it would not be a "dream"

We define dreams as subjective experiences so it would be a non-sequitur to now judge them as "objective"   We could then have objective knowledge of God which ain't happenin'.

What MAKES an experience "objective" is that it can be experienced by others.   The future is irrelevant.  Maybe the alien ship leaves and never comes back- it was still an objective observation for those who agree on what they saw. 

 

[mfbukowski]

56 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

The culture was different (thats essentially what I was saying when I said "the world").  Anyway... 

As for doing things you believe in, I sort of agree.  But its also kind of like saying that if you believe in fairies and goblins then you will be able to see them, and if you don't believe then you can't, when in reality they don't exist and if you see them its because you have a vivid imagination.  You may also be in need of psychological help if you see fairies in the real world.  

 

Your beliefs limit your universe.  If you don't think something is possible then it is not- for you. 

[hope_for_things]

10 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Your beliefs limit your universe.  If you don't think something is possible then it is not- for you. 

I would call that having balance.  Common sense limits in life can be a very good thing.  Sounds like pragmatism to me, and aren't you the big pragmatist?  

Edited December 4, 2018 by hope_for_things

[Robert F. Smith]

Michael Licona, Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? What We Can Learn from Ancient Biography (Oxford University Press, 2016).

Looking at the differences in the 4 Gospel accounts, Licona examines instances in Plutarch’s Lives in which Plutarch did not tell the same version of the lives of the individuals in his different accounts, same as the variations among the Gospels.  Even with the same author, each account differs.  How can that be?  We have the very same quandary with the differing First Vision accounts by Joseph.

[2BizE]

I don’t think it happened like most think, including JS.  It wasn’t even recorded for many years.  I think it was more of a dream or thought in his head. Maybe a hallucination.

[Deerlodge]

“There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.” (D&C 131:7

 

 

 

[Meerkat]

On 10/30/2018 at 8:18 PM, rockpond said:

If they were physically present what would have kept the person 10 feet away from seeing them?

The same thing that keeps us from seeing angels.  They may be more refined than we are.  There are many wave lengths of light that we can't see, unless our eyes are attuned to it.  I know people who have had clear visions that are only visible to themselves.

[rockpond]

8 hours ago, Meerkat said:

The same thing that keeps us from seeing angels.  They may be more refined than we are.  There are many wave lengths of light that we can't see, unless our eyes are attuned to it.  I know people who have had clear visions that are only visible to themselves.

A vision is defined as:  an experience of seeing someone or something in a dream or trance, or as a supernatural apparition.  This seems to imply that what is seen in a vision is not physically there.  

If an individual is physically there, ten feet in front of us, does it matter how “refined” they are?  Wouldn’t we be able to see them either way?

[Meerkat]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

If an individual is physically there, ten feet in front of us, does it matter how “refined” they are?  Wouldn’t we be able to see them either way?

Deerlodge's comment answers your question, but there are other scriptures that shed light on your excellent topic.

"7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;
            8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter." D&C 131:7-8

"17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:"  Acts 2:7

"6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. 7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
            8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold..."  Numbers 12:6-8

The scriptures are full of this doctrine.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Meerkat

[changed]

Did anyone comment on all the different versions of the first vision?  Sounds like the first written account was trinitarian - with only one Heavenly vision, then later versions were changed to include two beings instead of one.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 12/15/2018 at 6:14 PM, 2BizE said:

I don’t think it happened like most think, including JS.  It wasn’t even recorded for many years.  I think it was more of a dream or thought in his head. Maybe a hallucination.

Lots of maybes.  How could we determine the truth?

[Robert F. Smith]

On 12/21/2018 at 12:11 PM, Deerlodge said:

“There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.” (D&C 131:7

 

12 hours ago, Meerkat said:

The same thing that keeps us from seeing angels.  They may be more refined than we are.  There are many wave lengths of light that we can't see, unless our eyes are attuned to it.  I know people who have had clear visions that are only visible to themselves.

 

4 hours ago, rockpond said:

A vision is defined as:  an experience of seeing someone or something in a dream or trance, or as a supernatural apparition.  This seems to imply that what is seen in a vision is not physically there.  

Since both LDS theology and science do not accept the category "supernatural," it would seem to be a false definition.  It is either physical, or it is an hallucination.  And that applies as much to Saul on the road to Damascus as it does to Joseph Smith.

4 hours ago, rockpond said:

If an individual is physically there, ten feet in front of us, does it matter how “refined” they are?  Wouldn’t we be able to see them either way?

Of course not.  We already know full well from science that there are many physical realities which we are unable to see.  The most recent and vexing physical reality which we cannot see or even directly detect with instruments is dark matter.  The electromagnetic spectrum is another physical reality which has invisible wavelengths.  Sound waves are not only invisible, but some sounds we cannot even hear, although we have instruments which can detect them.

[Meerkat]

6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Lots of maybes.  How could we determine the truth?

Prayer?  Read the scriptures? Seek a personal experience from the Holy Ghost?  Follow the teachings and test the fruits in one's own life?  Those are things I have done that confirm the First Vision to my satisfaction.  Obviously, such proofs are subjective, but real to many individuals.  

[rockpond]

On 12/23/2018 at 8:14 AM, Meerkat said:

Deerlodge's comment answers your question, but there are other scriptures that shed light on your excellent topic.

"7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;
            8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter." D&C 131:7-8

"17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:"  Acts 2:7

"6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. 7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
            8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold..."  Numbers 12:6-8

The scriptures are full of this doctrine.

So, in citing these verses, are you saying that you believe the First Vision was beings of spirit that appeared but that those spirits had some of physicality (matter)?

[rockpond]

On 12/23/2018 at 11:19 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

 

 

Since both LDS theology and science do not accept the category "supernatural," it would seem to be a false definition.  It is either physical, or it is an hallucination.  And that applies as much to Saul on the road to Damascus as it does to Joseph Smith.

Of course not.  We already know full well from science that there are many physical realities which we are unable to see.  The most recent and vexing physical reality which we cannot see or even directly detect with instruments is dark matter.  The electromagnetic spectrum is another physical reality which has invisible wavelengths.  Sound waves are not only invisible, but some sounds we cannot even hear, although we have instruments which can detect them.

But we aren't talking about something like dark matter or the electromagnetic spectrum.

Our theology is that God has a body.  That Christ would have had a resurrected body at the time of the First Vision.  We also have a clear idea of what these bodies are like as ours were created in the image of theirs.

My OP question is asking if people believe they were there with their bodies or was it a "vision", meaning that they weren't physically present.  These recent follow up posts, IF I am reading them correctly, seem to imply that the Father and Son could have separated their spirits from their bodies in order to make a spiritual visit to the Sacred Grove.  Am I understanding that correctly?  It's an interesting theory.

[Meerkat]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

So, in citing these verses, are you saying that you believe the First Vision was beings of spirit that appeared but that those spirits had some of physicality (matter)?

Yes.  They were resurrected beings made of more refined matter.  Joseph apprehended them.  God the Father and Jesus Christ are glorified and perfected beings.  They can show themselves to mortals at will, as Jesus appeared to the two disciples on the road to Ameus and in the upper room.  I believe Joseph was spiritually prepared by God to see them.  While they could tone down the glory and appear to anyone, the First Vision was a special circumstance that I believe was for Joseph Smith only.  Joseph spoke if being constrained by beings from the unseen world when he tried to pray.  Then God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared and the adversary left.  But at this point, It's speculation on my part.

Edited December 26, 2018 by Meerkat

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

So, in citing these verses, are you saying that you believe the First Vision was beings of spirit that appeared but that those spirits had some of physicality (matter)?

 

1 minute ago, Meerkat said:

Yes.  They were resurrected beings that Joseph apprehended.  God the Father and Jesus Christ are glorified and perfected beings.  They can show themselves to mortals at will, as Jesus appeared to the two disciples on the road to Ameus and in the upper room.  I believe Joseph was spiritually prepared by God to see them.  While they could tone down the glory and appear to anyone, the First Vision was a special circumstance that I believe was for Joseph Smith only.  Joseph spoke if being constrained by beings from the unseen world when he tried to pray.  Then God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared and the adversary left.  But at this point, It's speculation on my part.

 

So you believe that they visited Joseph as resurrected beings (with their physical bodies)?

I'm not trying to be annoying but I asked if you believed they appeared as beings of spirit.  You answered "yes" but then went on to explain that they are resurrected beings.  "Resurrected beings" for me means that they have their physical bodies.  Do you see this differently... perhaps they temporarily separated themselves from their physical resurrected bodies to appear in spirit to Joseph?

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, rockpond said:

But we aren't talking about something like dark matter or the electromagnetic spectrum.

Our theology is that God has a body.  That Christ would have had a resurrected body at the time of the First Vision.  We also have a clear idea of what these bodies are like as ours were created in the image of theirs.

My OP question is asking if people believe they were there with their bodies or was it a "vision", meaning that they weren't physically present.  These recent follow up posts, IF I am reading them correctly, seem to imply that the Father and Son could have separated their spirits from their bodies in order to make a spiritual visit to the Sacred Grove.  Am I understanding that correctly?  It's an interesting theory.

It was beyond categories like these, presently unknowable 

In even fifty years, these categories will sound as if you were speaking of phlogiston and the ethers. 

[rockpond]

4 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

It was beyond categories like these, presently unknowable 

In even fifty years, these categories will sound as if you were speaking of phlogiston and the ethers. 

Beyond categories?  This is our theology.  Are you saying that the nature of what happened in the sacred grove is "unknowable"?

Also, it was a question asking @Meerkat about his/her beliefs.  This thread has been interesting in seeing how everyone understands the nature of the First Vision.  

Edited December 26, 2018 by rockpond

[Meerkat]

3 hours ago, rockpond said:

So you believe that they visited Joseph as resurrected beings (with their physical bodies)?

I'm not trying to be annoying but I asked if you believed they appeared as beings of spirit.  You answered "yes" but then went on to explain that they are resurrected beings.  "Resurrected beings" for me means that they have their physical bodies.  Do you see this differently... perhaps they temporarily separated themselves from their physical resurrected bodies to appear in spirit to Joseph?

I refer you back to my earlier comment:

"7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;
            8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter." D&C 131:7-8

Physical beings and spiritual beings consist of matter.  I accept the scripture that clarifies that spirit beings are of a more refined matter than physical beings.  How do you understand the difference between spiritual and physical beings? Do the scriptures help your understanding? If so, please provide your reference.  Thanks.

Edited December 26, 2018 by Meerkat