Content deleted Content added
Visorstuff (talk | contribs) |
Visorstuff (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 40:
*[[Apologist]]s counter that discrepancies could be explained by Smith tailoring the account to different audiences, thereby highlighting different aspects of the vision. Additionally, they point to evidence that Smith called Jesus Christ an [[angel]] or a heavenly messenger.
*Apologists have speculated that inconsistencies are due to second-hand retellings of the First Vision, which Smith kept to himself for some years before "officially" discussing the sacred event. Yet this notion is contradicted by Smith’s own statements; he insisted that he told the account almost immediately after it happened: "I soon found, however, that my telling the story had excited a great deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was the cause of great persecution,which continued to increase ... I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true”.[http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/firstvis.htm]
*Non-LDS scholars such as Jan Shipps and others have stated that Smith may have not realized the First Vision was anything more than a personal manifestation and "forgiveness" of his sins until after the organization of the Church, and even as late as the dedication of the Kirtland Temple - in which some of the same items taught in his first vision were re-enforced by vision. Because of this, Smith may have seen the First Vision, his [[crystallomancy]] abilities via the [[seer stone]] and the call to translate the [[Book of Mormon]] and establish the Church as unconnected events until the Kirtland Temple period or later.
The notion that Smith’s First Vision developed gradually is not exclusive to vitriolic [[anti-Mormon]]s. [[Grant H. Palmer]] is a graduate of [[Brigham Young University]]’s American History program, and for many years he taught or managed the LDS church’s Seminary and Institute programs for the High School- and College-aged faithful. He argues there is plain, direct evidence--primarily Smith’s own writings--demonstrating that Smith’s First Vision evolved over several years, and that the “current LDS interpretations of Joseph’s first vision ... simplify and [[retrofit]] later accounts to provide a seemingly authoritative, unambiguous recital.” (Palmer, 235)
| |||