Mormon Coffee

On May 21, 1845 an article on the nature of God, man, and angels appeared in the LDS publication the “Prophet.” Understood to have been written by the editor, LDS Apostle Parley P. Pratt, the article was reprinted in the 1903 book Mormon Doctrine of Deity by B. H. Roberts. Mr. Roberts identified this article, titled “Materiality,” as one of “A Collection of Authoritative Mormon Utterances on the Being and Nature of God” which he included in Mormon Doctrine of Deity. As a Seventy “noted for his doctrinal knowledge,” Mr. Roberts explained the purpose of the book:

“The task before me, on this occasion, is to take this subject and present to you what in reality the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches with reference to the Godhead.” (page 11)

What follows is a condensation of the main points of Mr. Pratt’s “Materiality” article.

What is God? He is a material intelligence, possessing both body and parts. He is in the form of man, and is in fact of the same species; and is a model, or standard of perfection to which man is destined to attain: he being the great Father and head of the whole family.

He can go, come, converse, reason, eat, drink, love, hate, rejoice, possesss [sic] and enjoy. He can also travel space with all the ease and intelligence necessary, for moving from planet to planet, and from system to system.

This being cannot occupy two distinct places at once. Therefore, he cannot be (in person) everywhere present….

What is Jesus Christ? He is the son of God, and is in every way like his father,… He is material intelligence, with body, parts and passions; possessing immortal flesh and immortal bones. He can…perform all things even as the Father—possessing the same power and attributes. And he, too, can travel space, and go from world to world, and from system to system, precisely like the Father; but cannot occupy two places at once.

What are angels? They are intelligences of the human species. Many of them are offsprings of Adam and Eve. That is, they are like Enoch or Elijah, been translated; or, like Jesus Christ, been raised from the dead;… They can go or come on foreign missions, in heaven, earth, or hell; and they can travel space, and visit the different worlds, with all the ease and alacrity with which God and Christ do the same,…

What are spirits? They are material intelligences, possessing body and parts in the likeness of the temporal body; but not composed of flesh and bones, but of some substance less tangible to our gross senses in our present life; but tangible to those in the same element as themselves. In short, they are men in embrio [sic] –intelligences waiting to come into the natural world and take upon them flesh and bones, that through birth, death, and the resurrection they may also be perfected in the material organization. Such was Jesus Christ, and such were we before we came into this world, and such we will be again, in the intervening space between death and the resurrection.

What are men? They are the offspring of God, the Father, and brothers of Jesus Christ. They were once intelligent spirits in the presence of God, and were with him before the earth was formed. They are now in disguise as it were, in order to pass through the several changes, and the experience necessary to constitute them perfect beings.

They are capable of receiving intelligence and exaltation to such a degree, as to be raised from the dead with a body like that of Jesus Christ’s, and to… go on missions from planet to planet, or from system to system: being Gods, or sons of God, endowed with the same powers, attributes and capacities that their heavenly Father and Jesus Christ possess.

What are all these beings taken together, or summed up under one head? They are one great family, all of the same species, all related to each other, all bound together by kindred ties, interests, sympathies, and affections. In short they are all Gods; or rather, men are the offspring or children of the Gods, and destined to advance by degrees, and to make their way by a progressive series of changes, till they become like their Father in heaven, and like Jesus Christ their elder brother.

Thus perfected, the whole family will possess the material universe, that is, the earth, and all other planets, and worlds, as “an inheritance incorruptible undefiled and that fadeth not away.” They will also continue to organize, people, redeem, and perfect other systems which are now in the womb of Chaos, and thus go on increasing their several dominions, till the weakest child of God which now exists upon the earth will possess more dominion, more property, more subjects, and more power and glory than is possessed by Jesus Christ or by his Father; while at the same time Jesus Christ and his Father, will have dominion, kingdoms, and subjects increased in proportion.

Such are the riches, glories, blessings, honors, thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, held out by the system of materialism.

Such the wealth, the dignity, the nobility, the titles and honors to which “Mormons” aspire. Such the promises of him whose word can never fail.

With these hopes and prospects before us, we say to the Christian world, who hold to immateriality, that they are welcome to their God–their life—their heaven, and their all.

They claim nothing but that which we throw away, and we claim nothing but that which they throw away. Therefore, there is no ground for quarrel, or contention between us. (Mormon Doctrine of Deity, pages 255-258)

The Christian world, along with the Apostle Paul, is content with “their all”:

For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. (2 Corinthians 4:5)

Comments (31)

Last week, on July 24th, the state of Utah and Mormons everywhere celebrated Pioneer Day, the anniversary of the 1847 arrival of the Mormons to the Salt Lake Valley. I’ve been reading newspaper articles reporting on various celebrations from all over the country. One from Puyallup, Washington got me curious. In the article, while briefly chronicling LDS history, the freelance journalist wrote this:

“The Saints had been despised, unwanted and hunted down. Orders had been issued to shoot them on sight and their prophet Joseph Smith had been murdered by an Illinois mob in June 1844. The Saints knew if they stayed in Illinois, their days were numbered.”

I wondered about the “orders…issued to shoot them on sight” and so I googled “shoot Mormons on sight.” I found an abundance of comments from Mormons repeating the claim:

“…one of my great-grandmothers several times removed was forced to flee Missouri after Governor Lilburn Boggs issued an extermination order, basically making it legal to shoot Mormons on sight”

“FACT: Up until the 1970’s it was legal in the state of Ohio to shoot a Mormon on sight!!!”

“At one point, the governor of Missouri even issued an ‘extermination order,’ which mandated that any Mormons who refused to leave the state were to be shot on sight.”

“An extermination order is issued by a person in governnmental control. When Gov. Milburn Boggs did that it made it legal to shoot a Mormon on sight, man, woman, or child. Not sure if there was a bounty or not, but it was legal to mass murder. It was open season on Mormons.”

“Legal to mass murder”? Hmmm….

The “Extermination Order” issued by Governor Boggs on October 27, 1838 was this:

Headquarters of the Militia,
City of Jefferson, Oct. 27, 1838.

Gen. John B. Clark:

Sir:–Since the order of this morning to you, directing you to cause four hundred mounted men to be raised within your Division, I have received by Amos Rees, Esq. of Ray county, and Wiley C. Williams, Esq. one of my aids, information of the most appalling character, which entirely changes the face of things, and places the Mormons in the attitude of an open and avowed defiance of the laws, and of having made war upon the people of this State. Your orders are, therefore, to hasten your operations with all possible speed. The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the state if necessary for the public peace–their outrages are beyond all description. If you can increase your force, you are authorized to do so to any extent you may consider necessary. I have just issued orders to Maj. Gen. Willock, of Marion county, to raise five hundred men, and to march them to the northern part of Daviess, and there unite with Gen Doniphan, of Clay, who has been ordered with five hundred men to proceed to the same point for the purpose of intercepting the retreat of the Mormons to the north. They have been directed to communicate with you by express, you can also communicate with them if you find it necessary. Instead therefore of proceeding as at first directed to reinstate the citizens of Daviess in their homes, you will proceed immediately to Richmond and then operate against the Mormons. Brig. Gen. Parks, of Ray, has been ordered to have four hundred of his Brigade in readiness to join you at Richmond. The whole force will be placed under your command.

I am very respectfully,
your ob’t serv’t,
L. W. Boggs, Commander-in-Chief

This executive order was officially rescinded on June 25, 1976. Was it, therefore, “open season on Mormons,” “legal to shoot Mormons on sight,” and “legal to mass murder” in the state of Missouri for 138 years?

No.

What did the “extermination order” actually call for? Language is somewhat fluid, so we need to understand what words meant when they were said or written. Consider the definition of “exterminate” from Webster’s 1828 Dictionary:

EXTERMINATE, v.t. [L. extermino; ex and terminus, limit] Literally, to drive from within the limits or borders. Hence,

1. To destroy utterly; to drive away; to extirpate; as, to exterminate a colony, a tribe or a nation; to exterminate inhabitants or a race of men.

2. To eradicate; to root out; to extirpate; as to exterminate error, heresy, infidelity, or atheism; to exterminate vice.

The emphasis of the word had to do with driving out, not with killing. LDS Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith understood that the intention of the “extermination order” was a call for the displacement of the Saints. He explained, “…this action was a concerted effort on the part of state officials, to…cause them [Church members] to be driven from the state” (Church History and Modern Revelation, 3:155).

Months before Governor Boggs issued his order, LDS leader Sidney Rigdon gave a speech in which he told the Latter-day Saints,

“And that mob that comes on us to disturb us; it shall be between them and us a war of extermination, for we will follow them, till the last drop of their blood be spilled, or else they will have to exterminate us; for we will carry the seat of war to their own houses, and their own families, and one party or the other shall be utterly destroyed–Remember it then all Men.”

Sidney Rigdon spoke of spilling blood; Governor Boggs did not. In fact, Governor Boggs later stated that he had hoped to curb the Mormon insurrection without bloodshed, thinking his call for several thousand troops would “awe them into submission.”

As a side note, as I researched this topic, I found it interesting that late LDS Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, in his little book Truth Restored, wrote of this time, “…mobs [against the Mormons] menacingly rode through the Mormon communities, determined to wage ‘a war of extermination’” (page 57). Mr. Hinckley used terminology directly from Sidney Rigdon’s speech, not from Governor Boggs’ order; yet he did not tell his readers about the initial warning issued by that Mormon leader. He did not mention that Joseph Smith’s right-hand man uttered those fightin’ words.

Another fact that is important to note regarding the action mandated by the 1838 “extermination order” is that it was issued as a military order. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism explains,

“Boggs, acting in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the Missouri militia, ordered General John B. Clark to March to Ray County with a division of militia to carry out operations against armed Mormons. The order described the Mormons as being in ‘open and avowed defiance of the laws, and of having made war upon the people of this State.’” (Volume 1, “Extermination Order”)

This was in consequence of (among other things) the October 25th Battle of Crooked River, in which an armed company of Mormon men attacked state troops. The situation in upper Missouri continued to escalate until Joseph Smith’s surrender on November 1, 1838, bringing the Mormon War in Missouri to an end. Some believe it also ended the binding force of the “extermination order” as that was a military order given to direct troops in a time of war.

Whatever the case, the “extermination order” never gave people wholesale permission to “shoot Mormons on sight” in Missouri or anywhere else. Mormons have a skewed view of the Missouri persecutions and Governor Boggs’ “extermination order” as demonstrated by the comments quoted above. Misinformation and false assertions abound, whipping up indignation all around. Consider this comment left by someone at a web site dedicated to “Archiving Early America”:

“Hundreds of Mormons were beaten, lynched, murdered, looted, tarred and raped under color of Executive Order Number 44 [the so-called "Extermination Order"].”

This is just not true, plain and simple. History does not support this assertion, yet Mormons believe and repeat these things, all the while building their senses of identity and foundations of faith on yet one more faith-promoting deception.

Comments (21)

“The possibility of finding buried treasure fascinated many in late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century America. Reports of searching for such riches were widespread in the Palmyra [New York] area, and extant accounts show that treasure was generally sought through supernatural means. Locations for buried wealth and lost Spanish mines were sometimes located through dreams. Treasures could also be located by using divining rods, often made from ‘witch hazel,’ or by looking in special stones or crystals. Sometimes when a stone was used, a person would place the stone in a hat and then conjure the guardian treasure spirit. After finding a spot where the cache was supposedly hidden, the seekers would draw a magic circle on the ground around the hidden treasure. Sometimes they would maintain absolute silence, but other times they would recite magical charms or religious verses used as charms. Whatever the means, money-diggers needed to overcome the guardian spirit who had enchanted the treasure, otherwise the treasure would slip back into the earth.” (H. Michael Marquardt & Wesley P. Walters, Inventing Mormonism: Tradition and the Historical Record, page 63)

This is the trouble had by Joseph Smith in 1826. A money-digger by occupation and reputation, Joseph got into trouble when the treasure he had been hired to find continually eluded the treasure hunters. Here’s what happened.

Josiah Stowell was a well-to-do farmer in Bainbridge, New York. Believing Spaniards had once hidden a mine in northern Pennsylvania, Mr. Stowell decided to try to find it. Because of the Smith family’s reputation for having the ability to locate buried treasure, Mr. Stowell sought their help late in 1825. According to Mr. Stowell’s testimony, while still in New York, Joseph looked into his peep stone and said he could see the treasure Mr. Stowell was looking for; it could be found in Harmony, Pennsylvania. Therefore, Mr. Stowell hired 19-year-old Joseph to find the buried treasure.

After several months of unsuccessful digging, Mr. Stowell’s nephew, Peter Bridgman, became concerned that his uncle was being swindled. Peter brought a formal charge against Joseph Smith, resulting in Joseph’s arrest. As part of his own defense, Joseph made a statement, which said:

“Prisoner examined: says…That he had a certain stone which he occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were a distance underground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel[l] several times,… That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes, made them sore;…” (Inventing Mormonism, page 72)

Court records from Chenango County, New York show that Joseph Smith appeared before Justice Albert Neely for examination (a pre-trial hearing) on March 20th, 1826. After hearing testimony by witnesses and the defendant himself, according to Marquardt and Walters,

“the court concluded that there was enough evidence to indicate that the prisoner, Joseph Smith the Glass Looker, had claimed to have the skill to discover lost goods, a misdemeanor under the Vagrant Act, and had not actually found anything. Neely wrote in his court record, ‘And therefore the Court find the defendant [Joseph Smith] guilty.’” (page 74)

No further action appears to have been taken. Joseph was not sentenced to any penalty. There is some evidence to suggest that, due to Joseph’s young age, the court decided not to pursue the case any further.

The following year, 1827, Joseph claimed he found gold plates in the earth. According to his story, he brought the plates home and translated the text engraved on them into what would become the Book of Mormon. Early in the history of the LDS Church Mormons understood that Joseph located the gold plates by gazing into his seer stone, and used the stone in the Book of Mormon “translation” process (Inventing Mormonism, page 75).

To recap: Joseph Smith, the Prophet of the Restoration, admitted to using a peep stone to find buried treasure and other lost items. He confessed that he sometimes pretended to see treasure while looking at his stone. He was known and sought after as a money-digger/glass-looker. It was in this context that Joseph Smith announced he had found ancient plates of gold buried in the earth which contained the very words of God.

Ten years ago, then LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley was puzzled. He said, “I can’t understand why those of other faiths cannot accept the Book of Mormon.” Perhaps Joseph Smith’s reputation as a glass-looking money-digger could be understood as one reason non-Mormons question the authenticity of the book Joseph and his seer stone produced.

Comments (142)

The LDS Church embraces four volumes as scripture: the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price. Following are ten statements from Mormon sources explaining how the LDS Church and its members view the Bible.

“I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors” (Prophet Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.327).

“Many versions of the Bible are available today. Unfortunately, no original manuscripts of any portion of the Bible are available for comparison to determine the most accurate version. However, the Lord has revealed clearly the doctrines of the gospel in these latter days. The most reliable way to measure the accuracy of any biblical passage is not by comparing different texts, but by comparison with the Book of Mormon and modern-day revelations” (Presidents Ezra Taft Benson, Gordon B. Hinckley, and Thomas Monson, “Letter Reaffirms use of King James Version Bible,” Church News, June 20, 1992, p.3).

“The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances. There must be something to suggest or to draw forth the command to answer the circumstance under which we are placed at the time” (Apostle Orson Hyde, October 6, 1854, Journal of Discourses 2:75).

“…who in his right mind, could for one moment, believe the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?” (Apostle Orson Pratt, Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, p.47.)

“As all informed persons know, the various versions of the Bible do not accurately record or perfectly preserve the words, thoughts, and intents of the original inspired authors” (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.383).

“The Book of Mormon has been, is now, and will forever remain secure in the hands of the servants of the Lord, for which we are immeasurably grateful. But with the Bible it was not and is not so. It is now in the hands of intellectuals and unbelievers and ministers whose delight it is to twist and pervert its doctrines and to spiritualize away the plain meanings of all its important parts. And it once was in the sole and exclusive care and custody of an abominable organization, founded by the devil himself, likened prophetically unto a great whore, whose great aim and purpose was to destroy the souls of men in the name of religion” (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, “The Doctrinal Restoration,” p. 12; quoted in Monte S. Nyman, Robert Millet, ed., Joseph Smith Translation: The Restoration of Plain and Precious Things).

“The Latter-day Saint use of the Bible differs from the Judeo-Christian norm because it is not the sole LDS source of authority (see Scripture: Authority of Scripture). The Bible is interpreted and understood by Latter-day Saints through four important means: (1) other LDS scriptures, which enrich and give perspective to an understanding of biblical teachings; (2) statements of modern prophets and apostles on the meaning of some biblical passages; (3) the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible; and (4) personal revelation through the gift of the Holy Ghost enhancing the comprehension of the scriptures. Consequently, Latter-day Saints are not left without information about the meaning of many difficult passages that have divided the entire Christian world for two millennia” (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 1:107).

“During the Dark Ages—during the Black Millennium, if you, will—even the Bible that now is was kept from the people. Many is the martyr who suffered death by fire for reading or possessing biblical manuscripts. The translation and publication of the scriptural word was opposed with satanic fury in that day. For the present the devil has lost that round. Today he centers his powers on denying the authenticity of the scriptures and using them to prove such false doctrines as that God is a Spirit or that we are saved by grace alone without works” (Monte S. Nyman and Robert L. Millet, ed., The Joseph Smith Translation: The Restoration of Plain and Precious Things, BYU, p.13).

“The final contribution of the Prophet to our understanding of the Apocalypse is in the actual work he did on the text of Revelation as part of his inspired translation of the Bible. As was noted above, he deleted from, added to or changed a total of ninety verses. Obviously, not every one of those changes are of equal significance. The committee that worked on the LDS edition of the King James Version included changes for only forty-seven of the ninety verses, or just slightly better than half of the total changes.” (Monte S. Nyman, Robert Millet, ed., The Joseph Smith Translation: The Restoration of Plain and Precious Things, BYU, p.258).

“The infallibility of the Bible is a fundamental doctrine among Bible cultists, though by their own admission they cannot find a book, chapter, or verse within the Bible to sustain this doctrine. Infallibility and mortality are incompatible. We no more have infallible books than we have infallible men. Such a belief quickly leads to the ridiculous” (Joseph Fielding McConkie, Gospel Symbolism, p.232).

Comments (25)

One hundred and seventy-six years ago yesterday (that is, on July 20, 1832) Joseph Smith began writing a history of his life. This was his first attempt at recording his history. He worked on it for several months while living in Kirtland, Ohio, but abandoned the project in November of the same year. The account was never published in Joseph’s lifetime.

According to historian Dan Vogel,

“The History was begun in the midst of challenges to Smith’s authority, primarily initiated by Bishop Edward Partridge in Missouri, which evoked Smith’s introduction of the office of president of the high priesthood… It is therefore not simply an autobiographical sketch, but an apology setting forth Smith’s credentials as leader of the church. The History therefore contains the earliest account of what is known as his ‘first vision’ and earliest mention of angelic priesthood ordinations.” (Early Mormon Documents, volume 1, page 26)

Not only does this History present the earliest known account of Joseph’s First Vision, it is the only account of the First Vision recorded in Joseph’s own handwriting. There are numerous versions of the First Vision story, each one different from the next. The “official” story, which has been canonized and today appears in the LDS scripture Pearl of Great Price, was written in 1838.

According to late LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley, the First Vision is of the utmost importance to the LDS Church. He said,

“Our whole strength rests on the validity of that vision. It either occurred or it did not. If it did not, then this work is a fraud.’ (Salt Lake Tribune, October 7, 2002)

It’s interesting to note, then, that there are significant differences between the “official” version and the 1832 version of the story. For instance, the 1832 version tells of Joseph becoming concerned for his soul at the age of 12,

“which led me to Searching the scriptures believing as I was taught, that they contained the word of God thus applying myself to them and my intimate acquaintance with those of different denominations led me to marvel exceedingly for I discovered that they did not adorn their profession by a holy walk and Godly conversation agreeable to what I found contained in that sacred depository…thus from the age of twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things in my heart concerning the situation of the world of mankind…my mind become exceedingly distressed for I become convicted of my Sins and by searching the Scriptures I found that mankind did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatised from the true and living faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the new testament…” (Early Mormon Documents, volume 1, pages 27-28)

As Joseph first told the story leading up to his ultimate vision experience, he explained his motivation in an entirely different way than what is presented in the official account. Note that Joseph claimed in 1832 that he had discovered by “searching the scriptures” that different denominations didn’t seem to behave or talk as he thought Christians ought; he discovered in the pages of scripture that there had been an apostasy from the true faith and all denominations were in error.

In the official version, however, Joseph’s motivation for seeking God in prayer was “to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join…(for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)” (Joseph Smith – History 1:18). Indeed, according to the official version, as soon as Joseph gained an audience with God the Father and Jesus Christ, he asked that very question and was given a resounding and controversial answer. Well, did Joseph ask that question? Or not?

Another significant difference between these two versions of the First Vision story is in the actual vision itself. In 1832 Joseph wrote:

“and when I considered all these things and that that being seeketh such to worship him as worship him in spirit and in truth therefore I cried unto the Lord for mercy for there was none else to whom I could go and obtain mercy and the Lord heard my cry in the wilderness and while in the attitude of calling upon the Lord in the 16th year of my age a piller of light above the brightness of the sun at noon day come down from above and rested upon me and I was filled with the spirit of god and the Lord opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord and he spake unto me saying Joseph my son thy sins are forgiven thee. go thy way walk in my statutes and keep my commandments behold I am the Lord of glory I was crucifyed for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life behold the world lieth in sin at this time and none doeth good no not one they have turned asside from the Gospel and keep not my commandments they draw near to me with their lips while their hearts are far from me and mine anger is kindling against the inhabitants of the earth…” (Early Mormon Documents, volume 1, page 28)

Here Joseph said that when he was 15 years old (the official version says 14) Jesus Christ appeared to him and told him his sins were forgiven. This is the most significant part of the vision’s message as Joseph reported it. Jesus was also said to have spoken briefly about the state of mankind; nevertheless, the bulk of the discourse attributed to Jesus in the official First Vision account was not present in this early telling of the story. Nor could it be. The main content of the message Joseph received in the official First Vision account concerned God’s answer to a question Joseph didn’t need to ask according to his 1832 account, for he already knew the answer.

Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, in the 1832 account Joseph only testified of seeing Jesus; he did not say that two Personages appeared to him; he did not mention the Father whose introduction of the Son (“This is My beloved Son. Hear Him!”) is such an integral part of the official version. Did Joseph’s First Vision include God the Father? Or not?

This is a very important detail for the LDS Church, for the Church bases its understanding of the nature of God on Joseph’s First Vision. Ten years ago LDS Church News reported,

“In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President [Gordon B.] Hinckley spoke of those outside the [LDS] Church who say Latter-day Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I do not. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. He, together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages.’” (6/20/1998, page 7)

Latter-day Saints believe in a Christ who is not the “traditional” Christ because Joseph Smith emerged from the grove with a new and different understanding of the nature of God. Or did he?

In bearing testimony of Joseph Smith, President Hinckley once said,

“I have read and believed his testimony of his great first vision in which he conversed with the Father and the Son. I have pondered the wonder of that as I have stood in the grove where he prayed, and in that environment, by the power of the Spirit, I have received a witness that it happened as he said it happened.” (Ensign, May 1992, pages 51-52)

The question is, of which “way that he said it happened” did this spirit bear witness?

—–

For more information see:
Which First Vision Account Should We Believe?
Joseph Smith’s Changing First Vision Accounts
Photo of a portion of Joseph’s 1832 handwritten First Vision account

Comments (15)

Ron Huggins’ entire talk, “Those ‘Abominable’ Creeds”, is now available for $2.99 on MP3 audio and $3.99 on MP4 video. His suggestion on the use of “homoousios” between Mormons and Christians is particularly interesting. This talk was really helpful to me. Just yesterday I used three different things from it in a long conversation with three Mormon missionaries over lunch.

“Joseph Smith claimed that while experiencing his ‘First Vision’ he was told that the creeds of Christendom were an ‘abomination’ in God’s sight. Current Mormon leaders and apologists like to claim that they believe the Bible, but not the Creeds, thus attempting to drive a wedge between the Bible and historic Christianity. Professor Huggins shows how the creeds, far from contradicting the Bible, emerge naturally from it, and as such continue to stand as important witnesses for Biblical Christianity at precisely those points where Mormonism departs from it. ”

Your purchases help Mormonism Research Ministry help others!

Comments (1)