BrianH
01-30-2012, 03:46 PM
There are MANY significant problems and contradictions in the various accounts given by Joseph Smith as well as the accounts of his friends and followers pertaining to his alleged, “First Vision”.
First a little background. While Smith eventually claimed that his first vision occurred either in 1820, 1821 or 1822 (depending on which version you prefer), it was never taught in the LDS church until 22 years later and Smith did not even mention it in his official history of his own church which he published in 1835, long AFTER many significant doubts about the “prophet’s” character personal veracity were drowning the church Smith had started. While these facts do not prove this alleged “vision” never occurred (we cannot “prove” a negative), it creates, as most Mormon claims do, a huge chasm of doubt for a rational person – a chasm that must be filled before such a person can even begin to entertain the idea that this claim might be true. After all, can you imagine forgetting when or where you were married, what year you graduated high school or not mentioning your parents in your autobiography? If we mere mortals can easily remember these mundane dates and events and people in our lives, how much MORE should “prophet, seer and revelator” Joseph Smith have been able to correctly recall the most basic elements pertaining to the personal appearance of God the Father, or Jesus, or God AND Jesus or a bunch of angels or some "spirit" (again, depending on which VERSION of the story you prefer) in his own proverbial back yard?
Smith claims (and contradicts) that in response to a revival in his neighborhood he went into the forrest to pray and ask God which church to join. The sad reality, fro Momrons, is that there were no revivals held in or near Manchester, New York where Smith was living in the years (again ...you guessed it, depending on which version you prefer) when this was all supposed to have happened.
In Joseph Smith’s own first account of his vision, written in 1832, he himself he claims that already knew all other churches were false before he prayed to seek such guidance. He also claims that he was praying in 1823, supposedly AFTER his “First Vision” to know whether there truly was a “supreme being”. Here the “prophet” had already claims he had a personal visitation by God the Father Himself, even introducing Himself as “God the Father” ...and yet the so-called “prophet” somewhere in a period of months or years after that, he is praying to that very God to ask if a supreme being exists? Yet ...Mormons believe this guy.
But now ...to the contradictions within the accounts.
The contradictions within the accounts of Smith’s “First Vision” come in two basic flavors. There are 10 accounts that I am aware of. One set of the contradictions in those accounts are spoken or written explicitly by the “prophet” himself to various people and audiences. The others are secondary – appearing in the claims made by either the LDS church or Smith’s various friends, family and followers. The accounts are:
1827 — Account of Joseph Smith, Sr., and Joseph Smith, Jr., given to Willard Chase, and published in his affidavit of 1833
1827 — Account by Martin Harris given to Rev. John Clark, as published in his book Gleanings by the Way, printed in 1842, pp. 222-229.
1830 — Interview of Joseph Smith by Peter Bauder, recounted by Bauder in his book The Kingdom and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, printed in 1834, pp. 36-38.
1832 — Earliest known attempt at an ‘official’ recounting of the ‘First Vision, from History, 1832, Joseph Smith Letterbook 1, pp.2,3, in the handwriting of Joseph Smith.
1834-35 — Oliver Cowdery, with Joseph Smith’s help, published the first history of Mormonism in the LDS periodical Messenger and Advocate, Kirtland, Ohio, Dec. 1834, vol.1, no.3
1835 — Account given by Joseph Smith to Joshua the Jewish minister, Joseph Smith Diary, Nov. 9, 1835.
1835 — Account given by Joseph Smith to Erastus Holmes on November 14, originally published in the Deseret News of Sa****ay May 29, 1852.
1838 — This account became the official version, now part of Mormon Scripture in the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith — History, 1:7-20. Though written in 1838, it was not published until 1842 in Times and Season, March 15, 1842, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 727-728, 748-749, 753.
1844 — Account in An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States, edited by Daniel Rupp. Joseph Smith wrote the chapter on Mormonism.
1859 — Interview with Martin Harris, Tiffany’s Monthly, 1859, New York: Published by Joel Tiffany, vol. v.—12, pp. 163-170.
Those of a secondary nature can be dismissed, though they are not unimportant. Mormons will have enough trouble dealing with the contradictions in Smith’s various accounts alone. But to avoid answering for them, Mormons will rightly point out that these are indeed secondary, even though they come from such vaunted figures as BoM "witnesses" and other leaders and General Authorities of the LDS church.
Of the above list, the ones in 1827 given to Willard Chase, the ones in 1830, 1832, both of the ones in 1835 and the one in 1838 are directly attributable directly to Joseph Smith himself. Note that one of these became the “official” version ...which begs the question ...why are there any “versions” at all – couldn’t the “prophet” simply tell the truth? Apparently not. Littered among these differing versions of this supposed “Vision” we find many minor contradictions that can be dismissed without any impact one way or the other on the matter of Smith’s personal truthfulness. After all, not every one remembers everything that ever happened to them. However there are several SIGNIFICANT differences that amount to overt contradictions in the most important and significant elements of each tale.
When I was a professional investigator, one of the most basic and obvious things we were trained to look for in taking the statements of witnesses, victims of or participants in an event was changing stories, contradictions and lack of precision with regard to the 5 “W”s – Who, What, When, Where and Why. This is BASIC investigative technique for any first year police officer, investigator, attorney, journalist or even just a conscious person seeking the truth. There are significant changes and variations in Smith’s various stories in 4 of the 5 “W”s
1.) WHO or WHAT? Exactly who or what visited Smith changes. In some versions its God the Father, in others is Jesus, in others its God the Father AND Jesus in another its angels, in another a “spirit”. Exactly Who or what actually appeared to Smith depends on which version you prefer to believe. One thing is sure. I know that if I had been visited by a man claiming to be God the Father and another claiming to be Jesus Christ (the “official” “version”) in the forest one day while I was praying, I am quite sure I would remember who they claimed to be, even if they were total fakes. So would any even minimally cogent person.
2.) WHEN? There is the matter of the year in which this astonishing, unmistakable event supposedly occurred. We learn from Smith’s own words that SOMEONE or SOMETHING (exactly who or what changes over among the versions above) visited Smith in a supernatural vision of stunning character in either 1820, 1821 or 1823. Again, I am certain that any cogent individual could manage to remember what year he was visited by God the Father, or Jesus or Jesus AND God the Father or a host of angels in person. Somehow Smith could not seem to get this straight.
3.) WHY? As mentioned briefly above, the versions given by Smith exhibit changes as to the WHY this vision came or even why he was seeking an answer. It goes from no motive (a spirit appears announcing the news of the golden plates of the BoM), to Bible reading and conviction over his sins, to his responding in confusion to a revival (which never occurred in the first place), to to a desire to know if God exists, that occurs AFTER he says God the Father appeared to him in person.
Fortunately for Mormons there at least appears to be a common reference among these accounts as to WHERE this supposed “Vision” occurred. No big dispute about that part of the story.
Just who appeared to Smith - a spirit, an angel, two angels, Jesus, many angels, the Father and the Son? When did this occur? 1820, 1821, 1823? Why did this vision happen ...no reason? A revival that no one in his region ever experienced? His own reading of the Bible? At what point was he telling the truth and at which point was he NOT telling the truth? They cannot all be true, becuase they clearly contradict each other.
The simple FACT is, "prophet" Smith contradicted himself in his own accounts of what SHOULD have been the most memorable experience of his life. And there are even MORE contradictions in the accounts given by the BoM “witnesses”, Smith’s family members and his neighbors and followers frequently claimed by these witnesses to have been given to them by Smith himself. As is virtually always the case, when the LDS church makes claims there is always huge extremely odd and very challenging facts that both contradict and challenge that claim. Smith contradicted HIMSELF. No matter how you cut it, as usual, Smith is lying. The logical fact is, you cannot believe any ONE of his accounts without making him a LIAR in his OTHER accounts. None of them agree together on all of the key points of who, what, when and why. The only thing they agree upon is where. Is that enough for you? If you are a Mormon, it must be. If you are a person with a mind for seeking truth, its not even close.
-BH
.
First a little background. While Smith eventually claimed that his first vision occurred either in 1820, 1821 or 1822 (depending on which version you prefer), it was never taught in the LDS church until 22 years later and Smith did not even mention it in his official history of his own church which he published in 1835, long AFTER many significant doubts about the “prophet’s” character personal veracity were drowning the church Smith had started. While these facts do not prove this alleged “vision” never occurred (we cannot “prove” a negative), it creates, as most Mormon claims do, a huge chasm of doubt for a rational person – a chasm that must be filled before such a person can even begin to entertain the idea that this claim might be true. After all, can you imagine forgetting when or where you were married, what year you graduated high school or not mentioning your parents in your autobiography? If we mere mortals can easily remember these mundane dates and events and people in our lives, how much MORE should “prophet, seer and revelator” Joseph Smith have been able to correctly recall the most basic elements pertaining to the personal appearance of God the Father, or Jesus, or God AND Jesus or a bunch of angels or some "spirit" (again, depending on which VERSION of the story you prefer) in his own proverbial back yard?
Smith claims (and contradicts) that in response to a revival in his neighborhood he went into the forrest to pray and ask God which church to join. The sad reality, fro Momrons, is that there were no revivals held in or near Manchester, New York where Smith was living in the years (again ...you guessed it, depending on which version you prefer) when this was all supposed to have happened.
In Joseph Smith’s own first account of his vision, written in 1832, he himself he claims that already knew all other churches were false before he prayed to seek such guidance. He also claims that he was praying in 1823, supposedly AFTER his “First Vision” to know whether there truly was a “supreme being”. Here the “prophet” had already claims he had a personal visitation by God the Father Himself, even introducing Himself as “God the Father” ...and yet the so-called “prophet” somewhere in a period of months or years after that, he is praying to that very God to ask if a supreme being exists? Yet ...Mormons believe this guy.
But now ...to the contradictions within the accounts.
The contradictions within the accounts of Smith’s “First Vision” come in two basic flavors. There are 10 accounts that I am aware of. One set of the contradictions in those accounts are spoken or written explicitly by the “prophet” himself to various people and audiences. The others are secondary – appearing in the claims made by either the LDS church or Smith’s various friends, family and followers. The accounts are:
1827 — Account of Joseph Smith, Sr., and Joseph Smith, Jr., given to Willard Chase, and published in his affidavit of 1833
1827 — Account by Martin Harris given to Rev. John Clark, as published in his book Gleanings by the Way, printed in 1842, pp. 222-229.
1830 — Interview of Joseph Smith by Peter Bauder, recounted by Bauder in his book The Kingdom and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, printed in 1834, pp. 36-38.
1832 — Earliest known attempt at an ‘official’ recounting of the ‘First Vision, from History, 1832, Joseph Smith Letterbook 1, pp.2,3, in the handwriting of Joseph Smith.
1834-35 — Oliver Cowdery, with Joseph Smith’s help, published the first history of Mormonism in the LDS periodical Messenger and Advocate, Kirtland, Ohio, Dec. 1834, vol.1, no.3
1835 — Account given by Joseph Smith to Joshua the Jewish minister, Joseph Smith Diary, Nov. 9, 1835.
1835 — Account given by Joseph Smith to Erastus Holmes on November 14, originally published in the Deseret News of Sa****ay May 29, 1852.
1838 — This account became the official version, now part of Mormon Scripture in the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith — History, 1:7-20. Though written in 1838, it was not published until 1842 in Times and Season, March 15, 1842, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 727-728, 748-749, 753.
1844 — Account in An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States, edited by Daniel Rupp. Joseph Smith wrote the chapter on Mormonism.
1859 — Interview with Martin Harris, Tiffany’s Monthly, 1859, New York: Published by Joel Tiffany, vol. v.—12, pp. 163-170.
Those of a secondary nature can be dismissed, though they are not unimportant. Mormons will have enough trouble dealing with the contradictions in Smith’s various accounts alone. But to avoid answering for them, Mormons will rightly point out that these are indeed secondary, even though they come from such vaunted figures as BoM "witnesses" and other leaders and General Authorities of the LDS church.
Of the above list, the ones in 1827 given to Willard Chase, the ones in 1830, 1832, both of the ones in 1835 and the one in 1838 are directly attributable directly to Joseph Smith himself. Note that one of these became the “official” version ...which begs the question ...why are there any “versions” at all – couldn’t the “prophet” simply tell the truth? Apparently not. Littered among these differing versions of this supposed “Vision” we find many minor contradictions that can be dismissed without any impact one way or the other on the matter of Smith’s personal truthfulness. After all, not every one remembers everything that ever happened to them. However there are several SIGNIFICANT differences that amount to overt contradictions in the most important and significant elements of each tale.
When I was a professional investigator, one of the most basic and obvious things we were trained to look for in taking the statements of witnesses, victims of or participants in an event was changing stories, contradictions and lack of precision with regard to the 5 “W”s – Who, What, When, Where and Why. This is BASIC investigative technique for any first year police officer, investigator, attorney, journalist or even just a conscious person seeking the truth. There are significant changes and variations in Smith’s various stories in 4 of the 5 “W”s
1.) WHO or WHAT? Exactly who or what visited Smith changes. In some versions its God the Father, in others is Jesus, in others its God the Father AND Jesus in another its angels, in another a “spirit”. Exactly Who or what actually appeared to Smith depends on which version you prefer to believe. One thing is sure. I know that if I had been visited by a man claiming to be God the Father and another claiming to be Jesus Christ (the “official” “version”) in the forest one day while I was praying, I am quite sure I would remember who they claimed to be, even if they were total fakes. So would any even minimally cogent person.
2.) WHEN? There is the matter of the year in which this astonishing, unmistakable event supposedly occurred. We learn from Smith’s own words that SOMEONE or SOMETHING (exactly who or what changes over among the versions above) visited Smith in a supernatural vision of stunning character in either 1820, 1821 or 1823. Again, I am certain that any cogent individual could manage to remember what year he was visited by God the Father, or Jesus or Jesus AND God the Father or a host of angels in person. Somehow Smith could not seem to get this straight.
3.) WHY? As mentioned briefly above, the versions given by Smith exhibit changes as to the WHY this vision came or even why he was seeking an answer. It goes from no motive (a spirit appears announcing the news of the golden plates of the BoM), to Bible reading and conviction over his sins, to his responding in confusion to a revival (which never occurred in the first place), to to a desire to know if God exists, that occurs AFTER he says God the Father appeared to him in person.
Fortunately for Mormons there at least appears to be a common reference among these accounts as to WHERE this supposed “Vision” occurred. No big dispute about that part of the story.
Just who appeared to Smith - a spirit, an angel, two angels, Jesus, many angels, the Father and the Son? When did this occur? 1820, 1821, 1823? Why did this vision happen ...no reason? A revival that no one in his region ever experienced? His own reading of the Bible? At what point was he telling the truth and at which point was he NOT telling the truth? They cannot all be true, becuase they clearly contradict each other.
The simple FACT is, "prophet" Smith contradicted himself in his own accounts of what SHOULD have been the most memorable experience of his life. And there are even MORE contradictions in the accounts given by the BoM “witnesses”, Smith’s family members and his neighbors and followers frequently claimed by these witnesses to have been given to them by Smith himself. As is virtually always the case, when the LDS church makes claims there is always huge extremely odd and very challenging facts that both contradict and challenge that claim. Smith contradicted HIMSELF. No matter how you cut it, as usual, Smith is lying. The logical fact is, you cannot believe any ONE of his accounts without making him a LIAR in his OTHER accounts. None of them agree together on all of the key points of who, what, when and why. The only thing they agree upon is where. Is that enough for you? If you are a Mormon, it must be. If you are a person with a mind for seeking truth, its not even close.
-BH
.