Detailed response to CES Letter, First Vision

< Back to FAIR Answers Index

Response to "First Vision Concerns & Questions"

[[../Book of Mormon Translation Concerns & Questions|Book of Mormon Translation Concerns & Questions]]

A FAIR Analysis of: [[../|Letter to a CES Director]] A work by author: Jeremy Runnells

[[../Book of Abraham Concerns & Questions|Book of Abraham Concerns & Questions]]

Quick Navigation

• Response to section: "There are at least 4 different First Vision accounts by Joseph Smith"
• Response to section: "The dates / his ages are all over the place"
• Response to section: "The reason or motive for seeking divine help – bible reading and conviction of sins, a revival, a desire to know if God exists, wanting to know which church to join – are all over the place"
• Response to section: "Who appears to him – a spirit, an angel, two angels, Jesus, many angels, the Father and the Son – are all over the place."
• Response to section: "The historical record shows that there was no revival in Palmyra in 1820"
• Response to section: "Why did Joseph hold a Trinitarian view of the Godhead, as shown previously with the Book of Mormon, if he clearly saw that the Father and Son were separate embodied beings in the official First Vision?"
• Response to section: "There is absolutely no record of a First Vision prior to 1832"
• Response to section: "In the 1832 account, Joseph said that before praying he knew that there was no true or living faith or denomination upon the earth"

"There are at least 4 different First Vision accounts by Joseph Smith"

1. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision
2. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision
3. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision
4. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision
5. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision
6. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision
7. REDIRECT Alleged Contradictions in the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision

"The dates / his ages are all over the place"

Source(s) of the criticism

Critical sources

Richard Abanes, Becoming Gods: A Closer Look at 21st-Century Mormonism (Harvest House Publishers: 2005). 35, 339-340 n.76. ( Index of claims ) Jerald Tanner and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 156–59.( Index of claims ) Wikipedia article "First Vision"–Primary editors: COgden and John Foxe, with additional contributions by multiple editors. ( FAIR's Analysis of this Wikipedia article)

"The reason or motive for seeking divine help – bible reading and conviction of sins, a revival, a desire to know if God exists, wanting to know which church to join – are all over the place"

⍗

Source(s) of the criticism

Critical sources

Richard Abanes, One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003), 27, 493 n.23 ( Index of claims ) Jerald Tanner and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 164.( Index of claims ) Christian Research and Counsel, “Documented History of Joseph Smith’s First Vision,” full-color pamphlet, 10 pages. [There is a notation within this pamphlet indicating that research and portions of text were garnered from Utah Lighthouse Ministry]

"Who appears to him – a spirit, an angel, two angels, Jesus, many angels, the Father and the Son – are all over the place."

Joseph Smith's first and second visitation of angels

Jump to Subtopic:

• Question: By what name did Joseph Smith refer to the First Vision?
• Question: What is the difference between Joseph Smith's first vision and other reported visions of God at the time?
• Juncker (1994): "Unknown to many, the early church fathers often referred to Jesus as an Angel....in antiquity the word 'angel' meant 'messenger.'"
• Joseph Smith: "Jesus Christ became a ministering spirit (while his body was lying in the sepulcher)...After His resurrection He appeared as an angel to His disciples"
• Joseph Smith (9 Nov. 1835): "I saw many angels in this vision...I was about 14 years old when I received this first communication"
• Joseph Smith (14 Nov. 1835): "I received the first visitation of angels, which was when I was about fourteen years old"

⍗

Source(s) of the criticism

Critical sources

Christian Research and Counsel, "Documented History of Joseph Smith's First Vision," full-color pamphlet, 10 pages. [There is a notation within this pamphlet indicating that research and portions of text were garnered from Utah Lighthouse Ministry]

Question: Did the actual words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear in Joseph's 1838 account of the First Vision?

Joseph Smith only referred to God the Father and Jesus Christ as "personages" in the 1838 account - their actual identities as Father and Son are only confirmed when one identifies the other as his "beloved Son"

Many Church leaders, such as John Taylor, repeatedly talked of Joseph being visited by the Father and the Son. However, when Joseph refers to them in the 1838 account, he only refers to them as two "personages," one of whom introduces the other as his "beloved Son." This clearly infers the identity of the two personages as the Father and the Son.

However, some critics of the Church assume that Joseph explicitly named the personages as the Father and the Son. One good example of such an assumption is a "mormoninfographic" that, in its effort to illustrate contradictions between Joseph's account of the First Vision, erroneously indicates that the words "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" actually appear in Joseph's 1838 account. This is for the purpose of contrasting the lack of mention of the Father and the Son by name in the 1835 account.

When challenged on this error, the author of the graphic said regarding the 1835 account: "you seem to be suggesting that I should depict something other than what is in the written record. There's nothing in the 1835 account that would indicate God or Jesus only what you are inferring from other accounts." Indeed, there is no explicit mention of God the Father and Jesus Christ in the 1835 account, but Joseph reports that one of the personages that appeared "testified unto me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

The only way to identify the personages in the 1838 account as Father and Son is to use an external source: The Holy Bible contains the phrase "this is my beloved Son"

So, where in the 1838 written record do the names "God the Father" and "Jesus Christ" appear? Nowhere: in the 1838 account Joseph refers to them as "personages." Yet, the author of the graphic "check marked" two items that are not present in the written record.

We agree that that "This is my beloved son" implies that the personages are God the Father and Jesus Christ, but the only way to infer that is to look at something that is not in the written (1838) record - you have to use the Bible (the account of Jesus' baptism) to make the connection. Therefore, allowing an additional record to be used to clarify Joseph's written words from 1838 violates the author's own rules: He won't allow Joseph's words from the other accounts to used to to clarify, yet he allows the Bible to be used to clarify.

A "mormoninfographic" claims that "pillar of fire" is not mentioned in 1832 account

<onlyinclude>

Question: Why did Joseph mention a "pillar of light" in his 1832 account, but a "pillar of fire" in his 1835 account of the First Vision?

Joseph Smith's 1832 account mentions a "pillar of fire," which he then crossed out to replace with "a pillar of light"

Joseph did indeed dictate "pillar of fire" in his 1832 journal account. He then crossed out the word "fire" and wrote "light." Therefore Joseph wrote both "pillar of fire" and "pillar of light."

Joseph was not certain of how to describe the light that he saw, characterizing it as both "fire" and "light." Orson Pratt, in his 1840 pamphlet "A[n] Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions," wrote of a "very bright and glorious light" which descended, yet he gave it the characteristics of "fire" when he noted that Joseph "expected to have seen the leaves and boughs of the trees consumed, as soon as the light came in contact with them."

[Joseph], at length, saw a very bright and glorious light in the heavens above; which, at first, seemed to be at a considerable distance. He continued praying, while the light appeared to be gradually descending towards him; and, as it drew nearer, it increased in brightness, and magnitude, so that, by the time that it reached the tops of the trees, the whole wilderness, for some distance around, was illuminated in a most glorious and brilliant manner. He expected to have seen the leaves and boughs of the trees consumed, as soon as the light came in contact with them; but, perceiving that it did not produce that effect, he was encouraged with the hopes of being able to endure its presence. It continued descending, slowly, until it rested upon the earth, and he was enveloped in the midst of it. When it first came upon him, it produced a peculiar sensation throughout his whole system.

Some critics of the Church wish to portray "pillar of light" or "pillar of fire" as a discrepancy between accounts

The is no discrepancy here: Joseph wrote "pillar of fire" in his 1832 account, and then crossed out the word "fire" and replaced it with "light." In his 9 November 1835 account, he states "a pillar of fire." In the canonized 1838 account, he describes it as a "pillar of light." The fact that in 1832 Joseph ultimately decided to write "pillar of light" does not negate the fact that Joseph originally wrote the words "pillar of fire" in his record. Some critics has attempted to show a discrepancy between the 1832 account and later accounts by pointing out that Joseph wrote "pillar of light." For example, the following critical graphic incorrectly represents the 1832 account.

Joseph Smith (1832): "a piller of fire light above the brightness of the sun at noon day come down from above"

Joseph Smith Letterbook 1, pp. 1-6.

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

Joseph Smith (9 Nov. 1835): "a pillar of fire appeared above my head...a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame"

a pillar of fire appeared above my head, it presently rested down upon me head, and filled me with Joy unspeakable, a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame which was spread all around, and yet nothing consumed, another personage soon appeard like unto the first

Orson Pratt (1840): "a very bright and glorious light in the heavens...He expected to have seen the leaves and boughs of the trees consumed, as soon as the light came in contact with them"

Orson Pratt describes Joseph Smith's First Vision in, A[n] Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions, 1840:

[Joseph], at length, saw a very bright and glorious light in the heavens above; which, at first, seemed to be at a considerable distance. He continued praying, while the light appeared to be gradually descending towards him; and, as it drew nearer, it increased in brightness, and magnitude, so that, by the time that it reached the tops of the trees, the whole wilderness, for some distance around, was illuminated in a most glorious and brilliant manner. He expected to have seen the leaves and boughs of the trees consumed, as soon as the light came in contact with them; but, perceiving that it did not produce that effect, he was encouraged with the hopes of being able to endure its presence. It continued descending, slowly, until it rested upon the earth, and he was enveloped in the midst of it. 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 enwrapped in a heavenly vision, and saw two glorious personages, who exactly resembled each other in their features or likeness. He was informed, that his sins were forgiven. He was also informed upon the subjects, which had for some time previously agitated his mind, viz.—that all the religious denominations were believing in incorrect doctrines; and, consequently, that none of them was acknowledged of God, as his church and kingdom. And he was expressly commanded, to go not after them; and he received a promise that the true doctrine—the fulness of the gospel, should, at some future time, be made known to him; after which, the vision withdrew, leaving his mind in a state of calmness and peace, indescribable.

Joseph Smith (1842): "surrounded with a brilliant light which eclipsed the sun at noon-day"

Joseph Smith, Wentworth letter:

I was enwrapped in a heavenly vision and saw two glorious personages who exactly resembled each other in features, and likeness, surrounded with a brilliant light which eclipsed the sun at noon-day.

A "mormoninfographic" indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision

<onlyinclude>

Question: Why did Joseph Smith state the he was visited by two personages and then just five days later say that he was visited by angels?

Joseph's diary was simply summarizing the First Vision as the "first visitation of Angels"

Joseph had described his vision in detail in his journal just five days earlier (9 November 1835) when he described his visit with "Joshua the Jewish Minister." When he described his visit with Erastus Holmes, he simply referred to it as the "first visitation of Angels." In Joseph's 9 November 1835 entry, in addition to seeing two personages, Joseph also mentioned that he had seen "many angels" in the vision.

Critics attempt to use this to show inconsistency in Joseph's accounts of the First Vision. For example, a critical graphic indicates that the 1835 "Erastus Holmes" account describes a different vision. The graphic implies that he didn't mention every other element of the vision, and that this makes it inconsistent. However, Joseph was simply offering a one-line summary of the event that he had described only five days earlier in his journal.

Joseph Smith (9 Nov. 1835): "a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame...another personage soon appeard like unto the first...and I saw many angels in this vision"

I kneeled again my mouth was opened and my toung liberated, and I called on the Lord in mighty prayer, a pillar of fire appeared above my head, it presently rested down upon me head, and filled me with Joy unspeakable, a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame which was spread all around, and yet nothing consumed, another personage soon appeard like unto the first, he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee, he testified unto me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; and I saw many angels in this vision I was about 14 years old when I received this first communication;

Joseph Smith (14 Nov. 1835): "I received the first visitation of Angels which was when I was about 14"

I commenced and gave him a brief relation of my experience while in my juvenile years, say from 6 years old up to the time I received the first visitation of Angels which was when I was about 14. years old and also the visitations that I received afterward, concerning the book of Mormon

1. REDIRECT Did Joseph have lustful motives for practicing polygamy?/Further Reading

"The historical record shows that there was no revival in Palmyra in 1820"

< Back to FAIR Answers Index

Articles about Latter-day Saint temples

Baptism for the dead	Overview Baptism for the dead in early Christianity Opposition to baptism for the dead
The temple endowment	The temple endowment Similarities between ancient and modern temple rituals The temple garment Temple ceremonial clothing Changes to the temple endowment Relationship between the temple endowment and Freemasonry Source of the temple endowment Application of the endowment
Temple sealings	Temple sealings and exaltation Latter-day Saint interpretation of "neither marry nor given in marriage" Paul on marriage in 1 Corinthians 7
Other topics	Money spent on temples Symbolism in Latter-day Saint Temples Elias and Elijah at the Kirtland Temple Spiritual manifestations at the dedication of the Kirtland temple The temple in Independence, Missouri Temples in early Christianity Temples facing east

Detailed response to CES Letter, First Vision

Question: Why does the Church spend so much money on temples?

Presiding Bishop Gerald Causse explained the Church's purpose and its focus on how it uses its financial resources:

We are not a financial institution or a commercial corporation. We are the Church of Jesus Christ, and this Church has no other objective than that which the Lord Himself assigned to it—namely, to invite all to “come unto Christ, and be perfected in him,” by “helping members live the gospel of Jesus Christ, gathering Israel through missionary work, caring for the poor and needy, and enabling the salvation of the dead by building temples and performing vicarious ordinances.”

In addition, President Russell M. Nelson taught,

The good this Church accomplishes around the world to alleviate human suffering and provide uplift for humankind is widely known. But its prime purpose is to help men, women, and children follow the Lord Jesus Christ, keep His commandments, and qualify for the greatest of all blessings—that of eternal life with God and their loved ones.

Latter-day Saints believe that these blessings are possible through certain ordinances (rituals) and covenants (promises). These ordinances and covenants are only available in specially designated places, called temples, as explained by the Prophet Joseph Smith:

The main object was to build unto the Lord a house whereby He could reveal unto His people the ordinances of His house and the glories of His kingdom, and teach the people the way of salvation; for there are certain ordinances and principles that, when they are taught and practiced, must be done in a place or house built for that purpose.

Three Possible Reasons

It is important to remember these doctrines when considering why the Church spends so much money on temples. There are three possible reasons.

First: The Lord commanded it. In a revelation to Joseph Smith, the Lord commanded:

Come ye, with all your gold, and your silver, and your precious stones, and with all your antiquities; and with all who have knowledge of antiquities, that will come, may come, and bring the box tree, and the fir tree, and the pine tree, together with all the precious trees of the earth; and with iron, with copper, and with brass, and with zinc, and with all your precious things of the earth; and build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein. . . . And verily I say unto you, let this house be built unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein unto my people.

Second: To honor God. In the revelation cited above, the Lord called for a house to be built "for the Most High to dwell therein." A member of the Seventy explained: "By requiring exacting standards of construction down to the smallest of details, we not only show our love and respect for the Lord Jesus Christ, but we also hold out to all observers that we honor and worship Him whose house it is."

Third: To show how much God honors us. In the revelation cited above, the Lord explained that in His house He would "reveal mine ordinances." These ordinances (and their associated covenants) are gifts from God to His children that provide them with greater knowledge, power, direction, and peace. Consider how you would feel if God wanted to give you these blessings in a dingy, dirty, broken-down building. You would likely feel that God doesn't respect you and that His blessings aren't really worth very much. By building temples with the "precious things of the earth," we show how much God values us and the incredible blessings He is providing to us.

Notes (click to expand)

Back to Top

"Why did Joseph hold a Trinitarian view of the Godhead, as shown previously with the Book of Mormon, if he clearly saw that the Father and Son were separate embodied beings in the official First Vision?"

"God" changed to "Son of God" in the Book of Mormon

Jump to Subtopic:

• Question: What changes were made to the 1837 edition of the Book of Mormon?
• Question: Why did Joseph Smith make changes to the Book of Mormon such as modifying "God" to read "the Son of God"?
• Question: Why did Joseph Smith change the wording in Mormon 7:7 from "is one God" to "are one God"?
• Question: Were any of these changes made in reaction to sectarian criticism?

"There is absolutely no record of a First Vision prior to 1832"

Christensen: "Runnells shifts the argument regarding the First Vision from 'absolutely no record of' to...'the first vision was unknown to the Saints and the world before 1832'"

Kevin Christensen:

On page 22 of his Letter, Runnells claims that “there is absolutely no record of a First Vision prior to 1832.” The FairMormon website response points out an article in the Palmyra Reflector from 1831 that indicates discussion of Joseph’s vision as early as November 1830. They also point to the allusion in D&C 20, which dates to April 1830. Notice that in his response to FairMormon, Runnells shifts the argument regarding the First Vision from “absolutely no record” to “this actually confirms the point I’m making in that the first vision was unknown to the Saints and the world before 1832. In fact, most of the Saints were unaware of a first vision until it was published in 1842.” But of course, that was not the point he was making. “Absolutely no record” is the point he was making. His response swaps in a very different claim, one much easier to defend....

In his original Letter, Runnells says, “Although the priesthood is now taught to have been restored in 1829, Joseph and Oliver made no such claim until 1834.” He uncritically repeats [Grant] Palmer’s claims about an 1834 date and leaves this crucially important information from 1832 off the table. When FairMormon points out the 1832 account, he labors to devalue the significance of this passage, and of other earlier sources that FairMormon mentions: “FAIR’s above answer actually confirms my point that the general Church membership was unfamiliar with the now official story of the Priesthood restoration until 1834. The best FAIR can do after scouring through everything for their rebuttal is this?”

Notice again the shift from an original argument against the priesthood restoration based on “no such claim until 1834” to a much softer complaint about the general membership being “unfamiliar with the now official story.”

1. REDIRECT Historical Challenges to the Accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision

"In the 1832 account, Joseph said that before praying he knew that there was no true or living faith or denomination upon the earth"

Is there a contradiction between First Vision accounts about Joseph knowing all churches were wrong?

Jump to Subtopic:

• Question: Did Joseph Smith decide that all churches were wrong before he received the First Vision?
• Question: How could Joseph Smith come to the conclusion that all churches were wrong on his own?

Notes (click to expand)

Back to Top