- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
On Own Now wrote the following comment in another current thread about the First Vision, and I think it is exceptional and deserves a thread of its own: Quote:In early-19th-Centruy America, God seemed alive. He spoke to lots of people. JS saying that he had seen God and conversed with him was not that unusual. Everybody knew someone or knew of someone who claimed to have seen God or heard his voice. The visitation of Moroni was different, because there was an artifact produced: the BofM. The early message of the Church was natural. God had sent a heavenly messenger to bring a book of new scripture forth… and here, we have a copy of that very book.
Conversely, today, we live in a time when God seems dead or distant. He doesn’t talk to anybody. So, it is a much more natural message to talk about the visitation of God to mankind, just like in Bible days, when God DID speak to prophets.
In the early Church, the BofM was the message that God sent to us. In our day, the BofM is a byproduct of God speaking to us again.
I believe that the transformation from one message to the other is attributable to JS, himself. The BofM was his most amazing achievement, IMO, yet he had already produced and published it by the end of 1829 (around the time of his 24th birthday). One thing about JS, he never sat back to enjoy what he had created; he continually reinvented it. Within six months of publishing the BofM, he was working on his new translation of the Bible. Shortly after that, he began the concept of Zion, soon after, he envisioned a Temple. But even that Temple wasn’t the end; he would envision an entirely new type of Temple only a few years later. Priesthood expanded from Elders to High Priests, to First Presidency, to the Anointed Quorum. Marriage went from union to sealing to polygamy. The People went from family & friends to community, to establishments, to theocracy, to kingdom. Baptism went from immersion, to washing & annointing, to baptism for the dead. Missionary work went from community, to region, to world-wide.
So, JS, himself, didn’t dwell much on the BofM, just like he had forgotten about the Kirtland Temple concept by the time he got going in Nauvoo. The BofM was still important to him, as evidenced by his working on producing better printed versions of it, but he seemed rarely to preach from it. In my opinion this was because the BofM had already been published. It was there in print… but JS was always exploring the new and pushing the envelope. Preaching from the BofM was preaching to the choir. So, the message naturally moved from “God delivered the BofM” to “God is leading us through a prophet”. And that shift made the FV more relevant than the visitation of Moroni.
Agreed, I think this does deserve its own topic/thread. I think this idea lines up very well with what current scholarship is saying – that the church progressed over time, but so did Joseph. He didn’t know all of this the day of the First Vision or the night of Moroni’s first visit – or the night of his last visit. Givens points out that Joseph saw himself as more of a gatherer of truth as opposed to a restorer of truth, and that he saw himself as a builder of Zion like Enoch. I don’t have a problem with multiple accounts of the FV because, for one thing, I think each time there was a new one recorded different things were being emphasized. It is plausible to me that initially JS saw the FV as an answer to his prayer about his sins being forgiven and that does appear o have happened. It is also plausible that while the stuff about not joining any church because they were all abominations was in there he didn’t dwell on that at first because that’s not really what he was concerned about and he didn’t yet realize that there was going to be a church established. Sort of like “Whew, my sins are forgiven and I shouldn’t join any church. Time to get on with life and quit worrying.”
I also think you make a good point about how we tend to contextualize things that happened 200 years ago in modern terms. It seems silly to us now that God talked to lots of people, but it wasn’t silly to them. It may have seemed quite silly to them if they knew most of our entertainment is fictionalized stories acted out on TV. Maybe seer stones don’t work in our day simply because we don’t believe they work and don’t try hard enough.
DarkJedi wrote:Maybe seer stones don’t work in our day simply because we don’t believe they work and don’t try hard enough.
We don’t need them since we have smart phones!
I second On Own’s description. The more I have read, the more I see it this way. I also wish we told the story this way, this would allow our church to progress instead of regress or stagnate. As to Seer’s stones – I had a dinner the other night with a group of Evangelical mom’s, the conversation moved into mysticism. As a group they all were adamant that anything mystic is not of God. The more I rolled this around in my head, I realized what a tough decision it would be for a church that wants to be considered Christian, main stream, and free from persecution to stand on a platform of a mystical beginning. Seer’s stones, scrying, the works. It’s a tough sell for me because we don’t use/believe/practice seer stones or water witches, but for Evangelicals it is satanic. That could really break the bank of interfaith relationships.
mom3 wrote:I second On Own’s description. The more I have read, the more I see it this way. I also wish we told the story this way, this would allow our church to progress instead of regress or stagnate.
As to Seer’s stones – I had a dinner the other night with a group of Evangelical mom’s, the conversation moved into mysticism. As a group they all were adamant that anything mystic is not of God. The more I rolled this around in my head, I realized what a tough decision it would be for a church that wants to be considered Christian, main stream, and free from persecution to stand on a platform of a mystical beginning. Seer’s stones, scrying, the works. It’s a tough sell for me because we don’t use/believe/practice seer stones or water witches, but for Evangelicals it is satanic. That could really break the bank of interfaith relationships.
The church has reached the point over the last 20-30 years where it wants to be respectable and accepted and wants to assimilate into mainstream christianity. The teaching courtesy of BRM and Joseph Fielding Smith has moved us that way. Discussion of the history about seer stones, money digging, etc. is just an embarrassment now and will never be part of the ongoing development of the church. Changes have taken place because they had too. So many things didn’t work and with every major change large numbers would leave JS would have to try something else. Inspired or not is something you just have to sort out for yourself. For me we have a good workable Christian denomination that is trying to do it’s best with members that for the most part don’t think or know about the weird stuff and just want to do what’s right. Come judgement we’ll all find out one way or the other.
No, this isn’t an early 19th century thing – look at the 60s, 70s, plenty claimed to talk for God then Old-Timer wrote:…but JS was always exploring the new and pushing the envelope.
This whole post is a very illuminating perspective, which I agree with. The only thing I would add is that it was not just an ambitious, industrious attitude that influenced Joseph Smith. All this only happened because he was continually being stretched by what God wanted him to do. The ambition and vision came from Jesus Christ and Joseph was only a willing participant.I respect that view, Daddy B – and agree with it partially. I do believe Joseph was inspired in much of what he did – but not everything. I know he would agree with that statement. Remember, Joseph himself said he was a rough stone rolling and that God was knocking off the rough edges – and that Joseph is the most chastised person in the D&C. When we try to paint him as perfect and infallible, in practical terms, I think we do him a grave disservice – and I think we also devalue the Atonement in a very real and important way.
DaddyB wrote Quote:The ambition and vision came from Jesus Christ and Joseph was only a willing participant.
I think I get what you are saying here, but I am less certain that things work that way. Stepping away from Joseph Smith and looking at other Old Testament Prophets – I tend to see a pattern where God/Jesus/Angels? some heavenly being – delivers some information, kind of like a glob of play-do, the mortal recipient (prophet) then gets to mold the clay, design/influence, direct the next event.
Abraham gets to negotiate for Sodom/Gomorrah
Moses gets to re-write the stone tablets
Jacob/Israel gets to wrestle with God
I see Joseph Smith much more like that. Only Joseph and God really know what was mans and what was Divine.
That’s just my 2 cents, largely taken from my own life. I get some info but a lot of times Heavenly Father just lets me do my life, then we check in and go on again.
Old-Timer wrote:I respect that view, Daddy B – and agree with it partially. I do believe Joseph was inspired in much of what he did – but not everything. I know he would agree with that statement.
Remember, Joseph himself said he was a rough stone rolling and that God was knocking off the rough edges – and that Joseph is the most chastised person in the D&C. When we try to paint him as perfect and infallible, in practical terms, I think we do him a grave disservice – and I think we also devalue the Atonement in a very real and important way.
I hope I didn’t give the impression that Joseph was perfect in any way. As God pushed him to his limit many times He also allowed Joseph to make mistakes in the implementing of His directives. He often gave Joseph general objectives and let Joseph figure out how to implement them. God wanted Joseph to learn from his mistakes as much as from revelation.DaddyB wrote:I hope I didn’t give the impression that Joseph was perfect in any way. As God pushed him to his limit many times He also allowed Joseph to make mistakes in the implementing of His directives. He often gave Joseph general objectives and let Joseph figure out how to implement them. God wanted Joseph to learn from his mistakes as much as from revelation.
DaddyB wrote:The only thing I would add is that it was not just an ambitious, industrious attitude that influenced Joseph Smith. All this only happened because he was continually being stretched by what God wanted him to do. The ambition and vision came from Jesus Christ and Joseph was only a willing participant.
The second (but earlier) quote above could be read that Joseph was a bit superhuman. I understand how and why Joseph could describe himself as a rough stone rolling – we probably could all do that. And that’s the point, Joseph was human, he did make mistakes, and and he probably made up at least some of the stuff for his own purposes. So many who have been thrown into crisis got there because Joseph is portrayed as something he was not. Anyone who struggles with Joseph after reading the essays on polygamy, the Book of Mormon or the Book of Abraham will tell you that is their issue – they feel as though they have been deceived when they realize Joseph was no less human than any of the rest of us. Some have a testimony that God is molding each of us into what He wants us to be, others have a completely different point of view believing that God has set the rules and lets us choose what we will become (sometimes with guidance, sometimes without). I believe Joseph saw through the same glass as darkly as any of the rest of us. That’s not a bad thing, IMO, and in fact strengthens my testimony of Joseph. Taking him off the pedestal and not worshiping him as a hero makes him much more of a real prophet in my view.
I like the clarification much more than the original comment. The ability to clarify is one of the best things about a forum like this. 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.