- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I know we’ve had discussions about the first vision here before. Upfront I will say that I believe Joseph Smith did experience a vision, and probably multiple visions. I believe him because he didn’t have to stick to his story and suffer what he suffered, he could have just gone to the frontier, perhaps changed his name, and lived a quiet, peaceful life as a farmer. My missionary son and I have been having an email discussion. I only just realized that until now he didn’t recognize the first vision as a vision, but believed God and Jesus were actually present in the grove. In fairness, I used to believe that too, before I actually examined and thought about the accounts. I don’t think it’s unusual for people to believe God and Jesus were actually physically there, and I think it’s a fairly widely taught misconception. The accounts actually make no case for a physical appearance – even the title says it was a vision. The appearances of Moroni also appear to have been visions. To my knowledge Joseph Smith never indicated they were anything other than visions, particularly the first vision. While it is possible that GAs in the past have alluded to it being more than a vision, it does not seem that the current batch does so, although I have not thoroughly researched it. (As a side note I think the current efforts at being more open are in part to correct the errors of teachings of the 60s/70s/80s that perpetuated many myths and frank untruths which have complicated the church’s theology and the church’s version of the gospel.) Understanding it as a vision doesn’t make it any less real (or more real, I suppose) to me – OT prophets, especially, often talked of visions and dreams and the BoM as several accounts of visions and dreams.
That said, I am willing to entertain that the above is only my perception. That is, I believe it’s possible that I perceive that many people misunderstand what happened in the grove, when in reality most people do understand it was a vision. What’s your perception of what happened? What do you perceive others think about it? Why do you believe as you do (or where did you learn it)? I’m interested in the understanding of others on the subject.
I am a product of the 1960’s and 70’s. I was taught that JS received and actual visitation. That is what has made it hard to swallow. It’s strange now as I type this that I never considered it a vision, but a visitation. But that is due to the way I was taught. When they tell us that we know HF and JC have bodies of flesh and bones and we know that from the FV, it’s hard to picture that as anything but a visitation. Eternity4me wrote:When they tell us that we know HF and JC have bodies of flesh and bones and we know that from the FV, it’s hard to picture that as anything but a visitation.
That’s interesting because that’s what spurred the conversation between my son and me. We were talking about the idea that God has a body of flesh and bones (the jury is out for me, BTW), and evidence of such. He brought up the first vision and I asked him how that proves it and he responded it was because they were both there. I told him the first vision does prove some things (Heavenly Father and Jesus are separate individuals, we look like them, etc.) but then explained to him that it was a
visionand there is no indication in any of the accounts God and Jesus were actually there. He reread the common account and agreed (he’s not sure he’s allowed to read the other accounts, even though it is an official church site and he has read the essay – but part of it is a time constraint as well). There are other scriptural evidences of Heavenly Father having a body of flesh, but the first vision is not one of them – and that is one of the erroneous teachings I am referring to from this era of the church that needs a name. FWIW, we have had some discussions about the BRM/Mormon Doctrine (and those like-minded) era of the church. Since I originally posted this I have been looking at this month’s Ensign. There is an article from Elder Jensen about the sacred grove. Here’s a quote (emphasis added):
Quote:In a grove of towering beeches, oaks, maples, and other trees located about a quarter mile west of the Joseph and Lucy Mack Smith family home near Palmyra, 14-year-old Joseph Smith saw
in visionGod the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. This divine manifestation, in response to Joseph’s prayer to know the truth concerning religion, began the Restoration of the gospel in this final dispensation. I like Elder Jensen (I’ve met him) and believe he is one who understands. I also think his words above are more typical of what the current batch of GAs say as opposed to those who perpetuated myth – mostly as parrots.
This is an interesting question and I think you’d get a wide variety of responses if you asked in Gospel Doctrine class if it was a physical visitaion or a vision. I had always been taught it was a physical visitation. Was it a vision while he was awake or was he sleeping? Did he “awake” to find Moroni hovering above his bed or was it a dream? I am much more likely to accept the account as a vision instead of a physical visitation. Dreams are more open to interpretation and confusion so there is less clarity with a dream versus a physical visitation but I think I prefer the less absolute version, especially when considering the multiple versions of the vision.
However, Joseph seems to have later claimed that God touched physically touched his eye which made it possible for him to see Christ so…
Quote:God touched his eyes with his finger and said “[Joseph] this is my beloved Son hear him.” As soon as the Lord had touched his eyes with his finger he immediately saw the Savior. After meeting, a few of us questioned him about the matter and he told us at the bottom of the meeting house steps that he was in the House of Father Smith in Kirtland when Joseph made this declaration, and that Joseph while speaking of it put his finger to his right eye, suiting the action with the words so as to illustrate and at the same time impress the [occurrence] on the minds of those unto whom He was speaking.
—Diary of Charles Lowell Walker (Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 1980), 2:755–56 [recorded 2 February 1893]
I did a post about the idea of looking at it as a dream / vision rather than a visitation here: http://bycommonconsent.com/2014/05/13/a-jungian-interpretation-of-the-first-vision/ hawkgrrrl wrote:I did a post about the idea of looking at it as a dream / vision rather than a visitation here:
http://bycommonconsent.com/2014/05/13/a-jungian-interpretation-of-the-first-vision/ Yes, I had forgotten about that. I remember reading it and recommending it to my psychology-oriented daughter.
To me, it is similar to a discussion on if we KNOW or just BELIEVE. Believing is like a vision…and knowing is more concrete like a visitation, a literal event. Some people believe so strongly they say they know. Just like some will see the 1st vision happened and call the area “The Sacred Grove” because they believe God literally was there.
There really is no way to prove it one way or another. It comes down to how you believe, and how literally you interpret things. And people vary along that sliding scale.
On my mission I knew God literally appeared. I have since been more prone to believe it as a vision, and that “no man hath seen God at any time” (see John 1:18) in the flesh. But instead, Joseph saw things with his spiritual eyes, similar to Emanuel Swedenborg, and others. I have also taken into account Joseph’s other visions…such as being in a small farming house, sharing a room with other family members, and Moroni’s visiting him multiple times in a night, of which only Joseph sees and hears it.
I still believe the value of the visions. Just don’t think we can “know” for sure any of these things, or that literal visitations ever occurred or needed to occur. So I choose to believe (not know), and believe in visions (not visitations).
Steve-o wrote:However, Joseph seems to have later claimed that God touched physically touched his eye which made it possible for him to see Christ so…
Quote:God touched his eyes with his finger and said “[Joseph] this is my beloved Son hear him.” As soon as the Lord had touched his eyes with his finger he immediately saw the Savior. After meeting, a few of us questioned him about the matter and he told us at the bottom of the meeting house steps that he was in the House of Father Smith in Kirtland when Joseph made this declaration, and that Joseph while speaking of it put his finger to his right eye, suiting the action with the words so as to illustrate and at the same time impress the [occurrence] on the minds of those unto whom He was speaking.
—Diary of Charles Lowell Walker (Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 1980), 2:755–56 [recorded 2 February 1893]
I don’t doubt this account in and of itself (in other words, I believe Walker said/wrote that), but I don’t buy that it happened that way. I think I get the difference in physical and spiritual sight/vision, just as I get the distinction between what I see when I’m awake and what I dream.
Heber13 wrote:To me, it is similar to a discussion on if we KNOW or just BELIEVE. Believing is like a vision…and knowing is more concrete like a visitation, a literal event.
Some people believe so strongly they say they know. Just like some will see the 1st vision happened and call the area “The Sacred Grove” because they believe God literally was there.
There really is no way to prove it one way or another. It comes down to how you believe, and how literally you interpret things. And people vary along that sliding scale.
On my mission I knew God literally appeared. I have since been more prone to believe it as a vision, and that “no man hath seen God at any time” (see John 1:18) in the flesh. But instead, Joseph saw things with his spiritual eyes, similar to Emanuel Swedenborg, and others. I have also taken into account Joseph’s other visions…such as being in a small farming house, sharing a room with other family members, and Moroni’s visiting him multiple times in a night, of which only Joseph sees and hears it.
I still believe the value of the visions. Just don’t think we can “know” for sure any of these things, or that literal visitations ever occurred or needed to occur. So I choose to believe (not know), and believe in visions (not visitations).
My experience is very much like yours Heber. I think calling it the Sacred Grove and reverencing the place adds to the myth of an actual appearance. The vision could have happened anywhere. What if Joseph had chosen instead to pray by/in his bed instead of going to find someplace to be alone? Would the vision not have occurred? Yet, like you Heber, I also believe Moroni’s visits were in vision (and use that same explanation – no one else in the room was awakened) so why couldn’t the First Vision have happened in the room? Would we then have the “sacred room” (which was torn down a few years later)?
I have been to the grove many times, I think the window in the temple overlooking the grove is way cool, I like the stained glass in the temple depicting the grove – to me, the temple is a sacred place, the grove itself is not.
Well Howdy Dodee on this one. I think I have even read Hawkgrrls piece, but it was not until today that I realized that other people have accepted the First Vision as a full visitation. Those even Ray’s words, but I read them, nodded and continued on with my “vision” version. So much so have I believed the vision version, I have assumed that all the “darkness and swallowing up” stuff was part of the vision. This has been a personal Aha! for me. I will keep this in mind when I listen to people’s convictions and testimonies. I really thought we all saw it as a vision.
For the record, I have had half a dozen dream/visions – that have played out in due course of life, and from my experience they are real as you are in them. Lighting, touching, voices, emotions, even wind – its kind of a re-enactment. I can’t speak to how Joseph experienced anything. I am very open to multiple possibilities, but Moroni’s vision didn’t require Joseph to be awake as we consider it, to be instructive or real.
DarkJedi wrote:What if Joseph had chosen instead to pray by/in his bed instead of going to find someplace to be alone? Would the vision not have occurred? Yet, like you Heber, I also believe Moroni’s visits were in vision (and use that same explanation – no one else in the room was awakened) so why couldn’t the First Vision have happened in the room? Would we then have the “sacred room” (which was torn down a few years later)?
The reason is they wouldn’t be able to have a “Joseph’s bed pageant!” The sacred grove is a much better venue for a pageant.😆 LookingHard wrote:DarkJedi wrote:What if Joseph had chosen instead to pray by/in his bed instead of going to find someplace to be alone? Would the vision not have occurred? Yet, like you Heber, I also believe Moroni’s visits were in vision (and use that same explanation – no one else in the room was awakened) so why couldn’t the First Vision have happened in the room? Would we then have the “sacred room” (which was torn down a few years later)?
The reason is they wouldn’t be able to have a “Joseph’s bed pageant!” The sacred grove is a much better venue for a pageant.😆 True, but the pageant is actually held at the Hill Cumorah, a couple miles away from the grove.
🙂 It’s an even better place – there are too many trees at the grove. Holding it in the cramped restored bedroom would be even less fun, though.And that reminds me. Back in the day before they restored the log house, missionary tour guides at the Joseph Smith house taught that the visits of Moroni took place in that house, and even pointed out the specific room. That house hadn’t been built when Moroni first appeared. There are many other things they also taught there that we now are taught happened differently and/or didn’t happen there at all. I don’t blame the old missionaries, they were using what information had been taught to them – but I bet there were real historians who knew better and could have stopped it.
DarkJedi wrote:What do you perceive others think about it?
I think if you were to take a survey that the majority of orthodox members would say that the first vision was a
visitation. I’d say that the overwhelming majority would claim that Moroni was a visitation. At the very least Mark E. Petersen would say that it was a visitation:
Quote:As an angel of God, a messenger from heaven, this glorious personage visited Joseph Smith in physical reality. It was no dream, nor any kind of mystic occurrence.
It was a visitation. Two physical beings communed together—with Moroni, a resurrected person of flesh and bones, emerging from the eternal veil and paying repeated and never-to-be-forgotten visits to this mortal farm boy, Joseph Smith. Italicized emphasis
theirs. Sure, that conference talk is extremely dated but I believe that represents the prevailing attitude. Also:
Testimony of the Prophet Joseph SmithQuote:When, according to arrangements, the messenger called for them, I delivered them up to him; and he has them in his charge until this day, being the second day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight.
I suppose you could get clever with the word “delivered.” If you take “delivered” to mean hidden in a predetermined location. Of course Moroni would have to visit that location at some point in time to retrieve the plates.
Elders’ Journal, July 1838Quote:Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the book of Mormon?
Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County New York, being dead; and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were; and gave me directions how to obtain them.
What’s interesting is that he uses the language “appeared unto me” but clarifies that Moroni was a resurrected being. Why the distinction that Moroni was a resurrected being unless it was a visitation. JSH includes many, many references to Moroni’s “visits.”
Quote:He commenced, and again related the very same things which he had done at his first
visit. Perhaps one or more encounters could have been visions while other encounters were visitations. Perhaps the initial event was a vision and subsequent events were visitations, not an either or proposition in the case of Moroni. Still I think what has been taught is fairly clear. Moroni visited.
The issue over vision vs. visitation would naturally have to extend to John the Baptist, Peter, James, John, Elijah, etc. would it not? Of course the laying on of hands to confer priesthood and keys would put those events firmly in the visitation category. If those people could visit JS why would Moroni present a challenge?
I feel this post is already overly long. I’d have to mull over the first vision and search out quotes but the version that I had always assumed was that it was indeed a visitation.
I think people could comfortably fly under the radar by referring to these events as visions but once detail was provided, making clear the distinction in referring to the events specifically as visions, it would quickly become a debatable issue in many of our classes.
DarkJedi wrote:What’s your perception of what happened?
I think that’s completely irrelevant. EDIT: My opinion, not the question itself!
😳 nibbler, don’t forget the account of the 3 witnesses:
Quote:And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes.
3 different individuals, at the same time, seeing the angel and also a physical object like the plates.
Seems hard to be anything but a visitation. Right?
And yet…
I have always been under the impression that all these events were visitations. I think, as Terryl Givens said in a podcast I was listening to, that not believing in the historicity (which I have a really hard time with) of the BofM presents the Moroni problem, in that if you don’t believe in the historicity of the BofM then you have to believe that JS was not being truthful about Moroni visiting him. Though maybe there was A Moroni that lived at some point in the world but just wasn’t a Nephite and he sort of left that out when he was talking to JS…
So I’m not sure what to make of all of it. Nibbler presents some of the other issues around this is as well, many of events are presented as visitation, interactions with heavenly beings (handing the plates over sounds like an interaction with a heavenly being, though I even wondered as a child that if he could just carry them away, why did he need to leave them there? Couldn’t he have just brought them to JS without having to go through all that trekking from his tiny little place in mesoamerica all the way up to Palmyra?)
Sorry, no good answers from this quarter…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.