Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 02:09AM

he was telling the truth about the sacred grove event!

http://www.sltrib.com/home/3843144-155/mormon-leader-differing-versions-of-joseph


Apparently he kept a straight face when he said it!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: verilyverily ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 02:14AM

Some people are so stupid it is unbelievable. They need a steamroller to run over them before they would believe the truth, [or so my mom would always say].

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Dave the Atheist ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 02:41AM

the trib claims 4 versions.
were there not 7 versions ?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Templar ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 11:30AM

I read recently that they have now found an 8th version. Sorry, but I failed to record the source at the time.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Templar ( )
Date: May 04, 2016 12:18PM

Not to be outdone, apparently a BYU apologist is now claiming there were TEN versions!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OGRD5QO/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Trails end ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 07:16AM

You git ta bed young feller....you too young lady....now that joker is a magnificent fight for jeebus patty cakin taffy puller...hes the guy jeffy was talking about...its no wonder poor jeffys bull gear jumped the hiefer shaft...there must be at least two...maybe three of these dumbasses to carry the fight...but what else can you do or say...while the good ship is gurgling...the waters up to your garmy bottoms...and the violin to play some nice gawd music just drifted away in the gurgle...what was that nice ditty the band played as the titanic went down?...yeah that one...yank my doodle its a dandy

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Doubting Thomas ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 07:44AM

Context is everything in studying the various versions of the First Vision.

The dates When the versions were presented. Who were they given to and for what purpose? Most important, what was happening with the evolving doctrines of Mormonism when the version was found/prepared/presented to the church and public?

Remember, the first printing of the Book of Mormon held a trinitarian view of the Godhead, and changes were made to follow up versions of the first vision to reflect the belief of separate spiritual entities.

It seems to make sense that the content of the vision would have to change to match the adjustment to the godhead in the Book of Mormon.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Doubting Thomas ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 08:54AM

This site is a great resource on the first vision:

http://firstvisiontimeline.com/#0

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: quinlansolo ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 08:57AM

Sorry to to burst your bubbles of "Ah","Uhhh"s for a minute....
For Hell's sake the Christianity is based on such contradictions.
There's very little surprising about the differing accounts of Joseph, when you read New Testament and Old Testament...

Of course people are going to embellish their stories....
It's been done forever....

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chicken N. Backpacks ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 09:18AM

He uses two of TSCC's most beloved buzz words when discussing problems in history and doctrine: "rich" and "remarkable", a sure sign of BS-edness. Ugh.

Thank you, DT, for this:

"The dates When the versions were presented. Who were they given to and for what purpose? Most important, what was happening with the evolving doctrines of Mormonism when the version was found/prepared/presented to the church and public?"

^This^ is *exactly* the tactic the apologists have been trying to use for years when they say that JS "emphasized different aspects for different audiences", but your observation turns that tactic on its head! JS emphasized "different aspects" not because of what he was trying to explain, but of what he was trying to sell.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: 64monkey ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 10:52AM

So I'm in a detective interview room at the local police station being questioned about a crime I may have been involved with. Each time I'm questioned I give a different account of my story. Not little differences but big ones. After my 4th and inconsistent version a conversation outside the interview room by the two detectives.

detective #1....So none of his stories are the same, or even close to being the same. What do you think?

detective #2....In detective school I was taught the more inconsistent a story the more it must be true. So let him go free, file no charges, I find his story believable.

That's the way it works in he real world right?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: bezoar ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 12:50PM

Richard Nixon gave multiple accounts of the Watergate break-in, making it the best documented break-in in history.

Bill Clinton gave multiple accounts of his interactions with Monica Lewinsky, making it the best documented affair in history.

Bernie Madoff gave multiple accounts to his investors of where their money was going, making it the best documented investment opportunity in history.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Razortooth ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 11:04AM

Always found it interesting that it has always been called the first "vision." If it was real, why refer to it as a vision? Did JS really see this, or was it only with his "spiritual eyes," thus constituting a "vision"?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: tumwater ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 11:34AM

JS could have CYA by saying that he had 4-7 visions, each had different persons present, and clarification of his understanding of earlier visits.

Remember he was a dumb, uneducated person and needed to go over the facts several times before getting the story right.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chicken N. Backpacks ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 11:56AM

And of course there's the description of the meeting between Martin Harris and Charles Anton: Anton gave two differing accounts about whether or not he wrote a note affirming the BoM "caractors" as real and then tore it up after hearing that JS was given the plates by an angel; apologists point to the seeming contradiction to discount Anton, but you can be damn sure that if JS did exactly same thing, they'd defend it and explain it away to the church's benefit.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Truthbetold ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 01:18PM

I recently visited the newly renovated Church History Museum in Salt Lake City (reopened about 6-7 months ago). In there is a movie room that shows the First Vision and it says there were 9 versions of the First Vision.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: want2bx ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 02:43PM

Yes, a total of nine (but there are probably more). According to the church's First Vision essay, the church claims four versions by Joseph himself and five secondhand accounts.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: BeenThereDunnThatExMo ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 01:49PM

We all just need to give JS a break on these differing versions don'tcha think?

Come come now...how many versions of your own Wedding Night are there I ask you???

Or so it seems to me...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randyj ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 02:24PM

For example:

"Maynes noted that the Bible, too, offers differing takes on the Apostle Paul's visionary Christian conversion on the road to Damascus."

His first logical error is assuming that the story of Paul's vision is true, and then using that dubious example to support Smith's story. He's using a Bible story to "proof-text" the Joseph Smith story.

Also, the Paul story went through multiple possible authors and language translations almost 2000 years ago, as opposed to Smith's story which occurred less than 200 years ago, and was reported first-hand by the alleged eyewitness.

That brings us to the next item of flawed logic: Joseph Smith was the only witness to this alleged event. The story came from his own mind and pen. There are no evil anti-Mormons to blame the inconsistencies on. Smith's personal credibility is crucial to the founding story of Mormonism. If he couldn't tell a consistent story, it's almost certain that it didn't happen.

Two other problems, which I've noted many times before: First, Smith claimed that he was persecuted by local preachers when he told them about his vision; but no local preachers, nor anyone else acquainted with Smith at that time, reported any such conversations. All of the accounts of Smith's 1820s public activities dealt with his money-digging schemes---not any religious claims. That makes it almost certain that Smith invented his story of an 1820 vision many years after its alleged occurrence.

Secondly, Smith's own closest friends and relatives told markedly different stories about his early visions. I had studied and written the material quoted below about 15-16 years ago. It's archived on Mormonthink:

Oliver Cowdery's account in the 1834 "Messenger and Advocate" stated that the "first vision" occurred in 1823. He did not report an 1820 vision, indicating that Cowdery was unaware of the 1820 experience. Cowdery's account also reported that Smith's interest in religion was sparked by the preaching of Methodist elder George Lane, rather than Smith's version, that claimed that he was inspired by reading in the Bible at age 14. Cowdery also stated that the date of the "religious excitement in Palmyra and vicinity" was in Smith's "17th year," which would have been 1823, rather than 1820.
Joseph's brother William gave an account of the event more similar to Cowdery's than to Joseph's:

"In 1822 and 1823, the people in our neighborhood were very much stirred up with regard to religious matters by the preaching of a Mr. [George] Lane, an elder of the Methodist Church.....The consequences [of this growing religious revival] was that my mother, my brothers Hyrum and Samuel, older than I, joined the Presbyterian Church. Joseph, then being about seventeen years of age [1823], had become seriously inclined, although not 'brought out', as the phrase was, began to reflect and inquire, which of all these sects was right.....He continued in secret to call upon the Lord for a full manifestation of his will, the assurance that he was accepted of him, and that he might have an understanding of the path of obedience.

"At length he determined to call upon the Lord until he should get a manifestation from him. He accordingly went out into the woods and falling upon his knees called for a long time upon the Lord for knowledge. While engaging in prayer a light appeared in the heavens, and descended until it rested upon the trees where he was.....An angel then appeared to him and conversed with him upon many things. He told him that none of the sects were right; but that if he was faithful in keeping the commandments he should receive, the true way should be made known unto him; that his sins were forgiven, etc.....he.....told us.....that the angel had also given him a sort account of the inhabitants who formerly resided upon this continent, a full history of whom he said was engraved on some plates which were hidden, and which the angel promised to show him....."

Note that William's and Cowdery's accounts both testify that the preaching of George Lane was Joseph's motivation to seek "inspiration." That creates a problem for Smith's claim that the first vision occurred in 1820, because Reverend Lane did not preach in the area until 1824. Joseph claimed that local ministers "persecuted" him, leading some to question whether a minister would appeal to Joseph as a man worthy of respect.
Note also how William's account co-mingles elements of the alleged "first vision" with those of "Moroni's visit" of 1823. That same contradiction also occurred in Lucy Mack Smith's original manuscript of her "Biographical Sketches":

"One evening we were sitting till quite late conversing upon the subject of the diversity of churches that had risen up in the world and the many thousand opinions in existence as to the truth contained in scripture......After we ceased conversation he [Joseph] went to bed and was pondering in his mind which of the churches were the true way but he had not laid there long till he saw a bright light enter the room where he lay. He looked up and saw an angel of the Lord standing by him. The angel spoke, I perceive that you are enquiring in your mind which is the true church. There is not a true church on earth." (This original version was deleted by Brigham Young when Lucy's book was ordered recalled and re-published, obviously because Lucy's version contradicted Smith's 1842 "official" version.)

All of the contradictions, originating in accounts from Smith and his closest family and friends, indicate to reasonable investigators, that the best sources for facts about Mormon origins has not been church leaders, members or church curriculum. And that of course, leads investigators and doubting members to believe that Smith may have invented the "first vision" story, probably around 1832 when he wrote his original version of it. And then the story changed with each re-telling, to meet Smith's need to reestablish his authority with the Mormon faithful. Or so it has been suggested by some historians.

There are other contradictions which cast doubt on the "first vision," such as the some of the Smith family joining the Presbyterian church AFTER God has supposedly told Joseph that all churches were corrupt; Cowdery's statement that Smith had wondered, several years after the alleged "first vision," as to whether "a Supreme Being did exist"; and the fact that as late as 1851, church publications such as the "Times and Seasons" were calling the angel that visited Joseph "Nephi," rather than Moroni. Since Joseph Smith was the editor of the "Times and Seasons," it seems incredible that he would allow his own paper to misstate the name of the angel, and not issue a correction.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: lavaman ( )
Date: May 03, 2016 09:06PM

The one thing that is more subjective, but yet is logical and reasonable to consider is that such a profound vision so grandiose, traumatic and short in time, would leave such an indelible imprint that there could be no confusion or changes in the story and on a theological level why would God allow such a thing....

As an example, I am now 51, and there are a few short traumatic events in my teens that I re-tell the same way every time...

And the other damning thing and has been mentioned already on this thread there's no evidence of this event at the time - not until 12 years after the fact...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randyj ( )
Date: May 03, 2016 09:34PM

Joseph Smith supposedly had his earth-shaking, life-changing vision at age 14. Well ya know what? I can remember every major thing that happened to me at age 14 in 1969. If a relative and I were talking about a certain event, I could remember details about it. I can remember movies I saw, schoolteachers and schoolmates, the jobs I was working with my father on at the time, etc. I remember Woodstock, the moon landing, RFK's killing, LBJ announcing that he wouldn't run for re-election, when "Hey Jude" came out, etc.

If two unearthly beings appeared to me out in the woods, you can bet that I'd remember how many there were, and what we talked about.

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything."-- Mark Twain

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: seekyr ( )
Date: May 04, 2016 12:41PM

Exactly. If nothing else, anyone would CLEARLY, REPEATEDLY, be able to accurately relate HOW MANY people appeared to them, especially if it was one or two personages. If you couldn't do that much, then God certainly picked the wrong person to appear to. Even MY memory is better than that!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: May 04, 2016 01:36PM

You might want to fact check yourself on three of the five. Honest, the trolls just love to seize on such minutiae in order to discredit this site. And I, for one, welcome fact checking even if it is painful and appears to be nitpicking.

Item: The first moon landing did occur in 1969. So did Woodstock...

Item: LBJ announced he wouldn't run for re-election in early 1968...

Item: Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated in June, 1968... This was a few months after Martin Luther King was killed.

Item: "Hey Jude" was released in August, 1968

Item: I did kiss my first girl, a bishop's daughter, honest, in 1969. This wasn't the one who devastated me a few years later, however, when she left me for an RM who said he'd had a revelation they were to be married.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Razortooth ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 03:53PM

Truth doesn't have versions.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: quinlansolo ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 03:57PM

It actually does; It's called Four Gospels.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 05:08PM

Are out in force (Thanks, EOD, for the link; I've been working and have only had time to set off a few hand grenades over there without bringing back a return-and-report).

There are over 1,300 comments already, and I got really bent because I spent some time on one referencing our own Simon Southerton's site (he's doubtless busy with his new start-up venture); Simon has addressed all of the "Apologist's Talking Points," which are a hodge-podge of the usual cherry-picking, circular reasoning, and outright fabrications (such as specious claims that Middle Eastern DNA has been found among Native Americans; honest, it hasn't, folks), and it boggles my mind that I can't use links to his site.

My thanks to our own Richard Packham for his in-depth expertise on linguistics; a wannabe scholar named Brian Stubbs has concocted some "purported connections" between Uto-Aztec and Hebrew...

That's the cherry-picking and circular reasoning I was talking about, and Richard's site made roadkill of his nonsense.

Here's a little more about the failure of the mods to "retrieve from purgatory" an in-depth reply I made to the nonsensical charges about their being Middle Eastern DNA sequences found among pre-Columbian American Indians. I cited Simon Southerton's work, which included straight-forward debunking of twisted claims about what a Nat Geo story said; it showed connections on the order of 26,000 years ago, and I linked his contribution to the peer-reviewed "Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration" as well which I helped him edit. Not surprisingly, there's no room in the scientific record for ancient seafaring Hebrews.

http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com

http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com/2013/07/encyclopedia-of-global-human-migration.html



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2016 06:00AM by SL Cabbie.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 05:55PM

Simon Southerton's blogsite are blocked via the software, and the moderator(s) aren't passing my posts on despite a promise to review them.

By contrast, a link to Richard Packham's site--equally devastating in different ways--was allowed.

/insert Cabbie rant about mods in general; I just had the same experience with NPR... What the bejesus do people have against honest debate and fact checking the $#!% talkers?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: GNPE ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 05:17PM

Didn't all the versions Start with Joe, who seemed to have had Truth Challenges?

I'm pretty sure his believers/belongers wouldn't make up conflicting stories/versions/tellings of something so important!


I think Joe's memory failed him, like a liar in a police interview or on witness stand 'can't keep it straight'

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: scarecrowfromoz ( )
Date: May 02, 2016 07:10PM

The Mormon leader urged his audience to read an essay The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has published about the First Vision accounts. That article says the versions 'tell a consistent story, though naturally they differ in emphasis and detail.'"

Saying that you met one entity and that you met two (God and Jesus) as separate entities is not consistent.

Can you imagine a criminal trial where they asked "how many people were there?" There was one, no wait, there were two, no one, no two. Case dismissed.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: canadianfriend ( )
Date: May 03, 2016 09:42PM

The more conflicting versions of a particular story, the more credible the story becomes.

Perfect Mormon logic.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: May 03, 2016 10:02PM

The GAs recognize that their adoring acolytes need help responding to the truths that are tastelessly uttered by the those attacking the only TRUE source of money and power that the Fossils have.

It's a war!!

All they have to do is provide the words, senseless though they be, and the acolytes are happy repeating the words. What's really useful to the GAs is that the word on mormon street is that if they, the GAs, say it, it's true!

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **     **  **    **  ********  ********  **     ** 
 **     **  **   **      **     **        **     ** 
 **     **  **  **       **     **        **     ** 
 *********  *****        **     ******    **     ** 
 **     **  **  **       **     **         **   **  
 **     **  **   **      **     **          ** **   
 **     **  **    **     **     ********     ***