- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I’m working on a future post for Mormon Matters considering the FV from a Jungian Dream Interpretation perspective, because it was a “vision,” which in my book resembles a dream a heckuva lot. If you look at the various accounts from that angle, there are a few things that emerge that are of interest: – there’s no significant difference between an angel or a visit from God; both are archetypes of spiritual enlightenment in response to his personal yearning for forgiveness and wisdom.
– the wrestle with an unseen force becomes a wrestle with JS’s inner demons – a manifestation of his own shadow side. This fits nicely with the concept of seeking forgiveness; he is in a wrestle for his very soul – with himself! But we all are to some extent, which is why we so often encounter negative aspects of our personalities in our dreams.
– from a Jungian perspective, the dream is actually very straightforward. He seeks forgiveness and wisdom, yearns for it with all his soul, must overcome his own inner conflict in doing so (his desire to sin, his own weaknesses), and receives spiritual elevation as a result of his quest. He asks the “wise teacher” his innermost desire, “how can I be forgiven/saved/exalted?” and he is given the answer. In eastern terms, the answer could be interpreted as: “Stop seeking for answers outside of yourself. They are not there. Those spiritual teachers are mistaken. Be patient. I, your internal spirit guide, will reveal more to you when you are ready to quit looking outside yourself.”
Again, to get where that takes you, one must assume that the FV was a dream, not an actual visit. But it does reveal an interesting nuance to it, IMO. This is one of the simplest mythical stories, in fact – the spiritual quest for wisdom. The hero’s myth.
Hi Curt, In many ways, you and I are alike. I love to analyze things from a scientific and historical prospective. If someone gives me a love note, I analyze their handwriting!!
(personality disorder).
Ok, all you guys that analyze the First Vision like it was a crime scene, I hope you don’t mind a little light-hearted teasing. I think I can tease you because I’m the same way.
The Medical Examiner really could use you in the crime lab or perhaps you would make a great detective.
I finally realized that I don’t need to fully investigate the “crime scene”, collect and weigh evidence, cross examine witnesses and reenact the “crime” itself. This ain’t no who done it!!!! This is one moment in the life of a 14 year old boy. And, whatever it was that happened, however it happened, it changed his life forever.
Hi Curt, curt wrote:Is it possible to remain a believer in the LDS church if the First Vision is a fraud?Is it possible that you answer your own question in your post?
You mention that Oliver, Lucy Mac and many of the early converts had no knowledge of the first vision as we know it today. In light of this don’t you think it is interesting that they still believed Joseph Smith to be a Prophet. My thoughts are; maybe we put to much emphasis on this. The early saints knew very little of the FV and were valiant to Joseph based on the Vision of Moroni and the translation of the plates. Do we need the FV to make Joseph a prophet? I personally don’t think so.
I think the problem comes when we want to claim the Mormon Church is the only true church, then we need the FV to be pretty clear cut. Joseph Smith being a prophet does not necessarily mean that the church is the only way to truth. Just my thoughts…
Quote:This is one moment in the life of a 14 year old boy. And, whatever it was that happened, however it happened, it changed his life forever.
I think the argument is whether or not the moment that occurred changed his life forever. The fact that JS placed little significance in the FV with regards to the restoration with the first generation of believers shows it may not have been a life changing event at all. And following the history of his various accounts, it can be argued that he only beefed up the moment to support what he needed at the given time; divine support. By looking at the flaws and the evolution in JS’ accounts, I think it’s fair to address the fact that he may have embellished whatever he needed to in order to save a church that was in trouble.
I think I’ll take a stab at answering this again from the dichotomy perspective (it can only be true or false). I was reading through all the responses and was thinking about how everyone is talking from their current perspective, often from a point of reconciliation of the paradoxes. That may not be as useful to someone who is focused on demythologizing this event in Mormonism. Here is the conclusion I came to: In the end, there was nobody there but Joseph (unless you want to count God and all the other-worldly participants). There is no way to prove this story is true or false, not in an empirical manner. There is no evidence but the story and a single experiencer.
It just isn’t something I can figure out as 100% true or 100% false, not in the sense of rational knowing (not in the sense people use this word in our Church). Pinned to a concrete answer, I personally decided that something probably happened to Joseph Smith. It doesn’t seem to have been like most of our expectations (from how we were taught) growing up. So in that sense it is false (to me). It was not how I thought it was. I think some more simple core experience happened. Perhaps JS went into the woods to pray and fell asleep. He dreamed the event? Perhaps he had a vision. That sounds more consistent to me. I have had “visions” at times, so I feel like I can relate to that experience. It looks like meaning and details were added to give it meaning over time. That is *VERY* consistent with other great religious stories (Old and New Testament come to mind in particular). The reason these things become canonical or are retained by their group is not so much because they are true or false, but because they speak a powerful message and convey meanings to the groups that retain the stories (like the FV does for Mormons).
The story is important, very important to Mormons. It contains a lot of ideas that are important to our mythology (J Campbell reference) and the faith image of our ultimate reality (Fowler terms). So jumping from the True/False examination to a reconciliation of the paradox of it, I give myself permission to enjoy the story. You can’t enjoy it if you don’t put yourself into it (sort of like allowing myself to believe it is true). This last viewpoint often frustrates people who are trying to figure out if something is a lie or not. It sounds like a sell-out.
The FV is, in reality, the foundation for the entire restoration. “That becomes the hinge pin on which this whole cause turns. If the First Vision was true, if it actually happened, then the Book of Mormon is true. Then we have the priesthood. Then we have the Church organization and all of the other keys and blessings of authority which we say we have. If the First Vision did not occur, then we are involved in a great sham. It is just that simple.” (New York Rochester Missionary Meeting, July 12, 1996.) (Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley, p. 227)
One of the assertions that is made by the church is that JS was explicitly told to “join none of the churches”, that they were all wrong. These are the words of JS and his own personal account of the FV and his answer as to which church to join:
“I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong, and the Personage who addressed me said that all their Creeds were an abomination in his sight, that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips but their hearts are far from me, They teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of Godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
He again forbade me to join with any of them.” (COPIED AND PASTED FROM THE JS STORY)
The assertion above is VERY profound. It firmly asserts that all other church as wrong – all other churches are wrong. The language is strong and authoritative. We are declaring to the world, boldly and apologetically, that their faith is wrong. For me, this is the most difficult concept of the FV. I know that there were people with a humble and sincere belief in the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I know that those individuals sought him diligently through prayer, fasting, devotion, sacrifice and obedience. It is hard for me to believe that the Lord would collectively condemn them as “an abomination” in His sight when these humble people had done none other thing than to seek Him, to hope for Him, to worship Him. I do not understand that part of the FV.
This is a copy and paste: Robert L. Millet is a professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University.
Several years ago, my colleague Brent Top and I sat with two Protestant ministers for a few hours in what proved to be a delightful and extremely enlightening conversation. Absent was any sense of defensiveness or any effort to argue and debate; we were earnestly trying to understand one another better. Toward the end of the discussion, one of the ministers turned to me and said: “Bob, it bothers you a great deal, doesn’t it, when people suggest that Latter-day Saints are not Christian?” I responded: “It doesn’t just bother me. It hurts me, for I know how deeply as a Latter-day Saint I love the Lord and how completely I trust in Him.”
My Protestant friend then made a rather simple observation, one that should have been obvious to me long before that particular moment. He said: “How do you think it makes us feel when we know of your belief in what you call the Apostasy, of the fact that Christ presumably said to the young Joseph Smith that the churches on earth at that time ‘were all wrong,’ that ‘all
their creeds [are] an abomination in [my] sight,’ that ‘those professors were all corrupt’ (Joseph Smith-History 1:19), and that in your Doctrine and Covenants your church is identified as ‘the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth’ (D&C 1:30)?” I can still remember the collage of feelings that washed over me at that moment: it was a quiet epiphany, coupled with feelings of empathy, sudden realization, and a deep sense of love for my friends. For a brief time I found myself, mentally speaking, walking in their moccasins, seeing things through their eyes. It was sobering, and it has affected the way I seek to reach out to men and women of other faiths.
Valoel wrote:The story is important, very important to Mormons. It contains a lot of ideas that are important to our mythology (J Campbell reference) and the faith image of our ultimate reality (Fowler terms). So jumping from the True/False examination to a reconciliation of the paradox of it, I give myself permission to enjoy the story. You can’t enjoy it if you don’t put yourself into it (sort of like allowing myself to believe it is true). This last viewpoint often frustrates people who are trying to figure out if something is a lie or not. It sounds like a sell-out.
I like this entire post, Val! I especially like to step back further and further and look at Mormonism as one’s mythology…the story that gives the member hope and purpose to get up and “do” every day.I also think this is a challenging time of transition. So much information is readily available. As we become more educated and empowered individually, the old paradigm taught in my youth (like you mentioned) of 100% true, or not…is evolving. There was an interesting article in “Parade” yesterday indicating that fewer people than ever believe in one, and only one, true faith.
“As Americans’ ideas of spirituality have become more expansive, so have their attitudes toward people of different faiths. Even though the notion that one’s own religion is the sole means of “salvation” has launched a million missionaries from this country’s shores, today only a small fraction are so fervent. A scant 12% of respondents said that their own religion was the only true faith, 12% said no religion has validity, and 59% said all religions are valid.”
http://www.parade.com/news/2009/10/04-how-spiritual-are-we.html From my mission days in Japan, “many trails lead to the top of Mt. Fuji, but they all get there.” This was a stumbling block for me as a missionary in the late 70s, but it is a phrase I resonate with today.
But we continue to hear talks, and quotes from leaders, that it (the FV) is either historically, literally true, or a fraud. I disagree. Frankly, (this may get me scolded here?…), I think that is a stage three-er approach. And most are stage three-ers. So I hear the words, and just chalk it up to each person — including the leaders — doing the best they can with what they’ve been given.
But that may just be me.
MWallace57 wrote:
“That becomes the hinge pin on which this whole cause turns. If the First Vision was true, if it actually happened, then the Book of Mormon is true. Then we have the priesthood. Then we have the Church organization and all of the other keys and blessings of authority which we say we have. If the First Vision did not occur, then we are involved in a great sham. It is just that simple.” (New York Rochester Missionary Meeting, July 12, 1996.) (Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley, p. 227)With all due respect to Pres Hinckley, I simply disagree. I think he was wrong in that chain of logic. I totally get the whole idea. I know a lot of members think this way. I accept that, but don’t agree.
The FV doesn’t prove anything about the BofM specifically.
The FV does not prove that exclusive priesthood authority was restored to the LDS Church. Those were separate other-worldly events/visions/visitations/stories in our history.
The reverse is also not true. One being “made up,” embellished or false does not necessarily taint the rest of them.
I agree with Valoel (I like what Rix says also). The FV is a stand alone, IMO. It was not used in early missionary efforts. It wasn’t considered critical or even widely known. You could interpret that to mean that JS felt it had personal significance but didn’t consider it to have significance to people other than himself until much later. The modern church has highjacked the FV (co-opted it) and attached meaning to it that JS never did. Did JS believe that God the father & Jesus had separate physical bodies? Yes. But the FV doesn’t prove that and wasn’t the origination of that (remember, it was a “vision” and he didn’t touch anyone). IMO, the FV is a powerful story for missionaries to share because you are telling an investigator HOW to find spiritual truth personally, not telling them why they don’t need to seek it on their own (because all the answers have already been given). Since when did Mormonism preach that the heavens are open because other people and prophets can have visions but you as a puny lay member are not entitled? That’s not what the church teaches. It’s just a faulty interpretation, IMO. It’s putting undue emphasis and assumptions into something that should be a powerful example for us to follow, not the answer to all our questions. I have also been enjoying this article entitled, Joseph Smith’s Recitals of the First Vision: I have to say that as a young girl, I gained my testimony from reading the Doctrine and Covenants (actually, my older brother started reading it to me). I was ten when my mother died, my older brother was 15. He was a budding young gospel scholar. Because we were just kids, 10 and 15, we related so well to the JS story. Having lost my own mother and grandmother just months before, I felt such profound comfort, that a young person, such as myself could have a real connection to God. I didn’t want to see a vision (I was afraid of ghosts). I actually thought it would scare me if I saw something, I just wanted to feel peace and comfort.
I soon realized that the Holy Ghost was that peace, that comfort. After JS received the gift of the Holy Ghost, there was really very little reason or need for him to see the Lord. The Holy Ghost is a Personage of Spirit and He cannot be seen with human eyes, yet you can feel his presence. He is very close to children, very nearby. It is too bad that I had to grow up, go to college, study science and analyze everything and everyone, but I still remember what it felt like when we were young.
hawkgrrrl wrote:It’s putting undue emphasis and assumptions into something that should be a powerful example for us to follow, not the answer to all our questions.
BINGO!
I think JS was fully into promoting theophany experiences until the practical realities of actually having to deal with a church full of prophets all getting different answers made him pull back and seek some organizational hierarchy in the Kirtland period.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.