
Few events in Mormonism are as important as Joseph Smith’s First Vision. It not only marks the official beginning of what LDS call ‘the Restoration’ but it also stands as a unique symbol of what makes Mormonism different from the rest Christianity. For believers the event is literal justification of the LDS claim of continuing revelation and being God’s one true church. It is the first thing taught by missionaries and often one of the last stands for challenged testimonies. Considering the importance of this event it’s not surprising that LDS have a well-rehearsed familiarity with how the Vision officially went down. What is surprising is that LDS know little of the larger story surrounding this foundational event.
What I was taught:
Like nearly all LDS for the past 100 years I was taught Joseph Smith’s First Vision from the official LDS account found in the Pearl of Great Price. It goes something like this:
Joseph Smith was a conscientious young boy born growing in the middle of the Second Great Awakening and wanted to know which Church to join. The various denominations vying for his religious attention in the “burned over district” of New York state where he lived, had differing views on God’s will concerning man. Joseph was confused about which church to join because of the differences.
One day while reading the Bible he came across James chapter 1- verse 5 which reads, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.”
In the spring of 1820 Joseph retired to a grove of trees near his house and prayed, offering up the “desires of (his) heart” — which were to find out which Church was God’s true Church. Joseph said about attempting to pray: “I seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.” Joseph exerted all his powers to call upon God to deliver him. He then saw a pillar of light over his head and God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him. According to Joseph, God the Father said pointing to Jesus “This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!”
Joseph asked which Church he should join and was instructed to join none of them for they all were wrong and their were creeds an abomination— also ”they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” Joseph was taught many more things which he could not then reveal.
Joseph came to himself lying on his back looking up. Regaining his strength, he returned home.
A few days later while speaking to a Methodist preacher who was involved in the revivals, Joseph related the experience. The preacher claimed the vision was of the devil and that revelation had ceased. Joseph claimed that telling the story caused other religious leaders to persecute him. The story was, as he said “sufficient to excite the public mind against me, and create a bitter persecution; and this was common among all the sects—all united to persecute me.”
What I’ve learned (the revelation):
First, I learned that the actual truth about Joseph Smith’s First Vision— when and how it happened etc— is anything but clear. There are a number of conflicting sources that make the event far less clear than the Joseph Smith History account suggests. Here’s what I think is clear.
The First Vision was not taught in the early Church— neither was it seen then as the foundational event it is now. No account of the event was published before 1842 (Times and Seasons) and sources suggest it wasn’t commonly taught in the Church until even later. In fact, Joseph neglected to include the First Vision at all in the first history of the Church he and Oliver Cowdery published in 1835. What is now the official account was recorded as part of an official history begun in 1838 (eighteen years after the official date) and not published until 1842 (see above)— 22 years after the 1820 date.
From 1829 to the mid-1800s the Mormon narrative instead focused more on the Book of Mormon and angelic visitations (in some accounts Nephi , in some Moroni) as the origins of the restoration. Brigham Young and other leaders in Utah often spoke of Joseph’s mission beginning with visits from an angel rather than a vision of God.
There is some question about the timing of the event. Joseph Smith says the vision took place in 1820 when he was 14 but other evidence challenges this assertion. Recollections by William Smith and Oliver Cowdery instead place the event around 1823 or 1824. Cowdery wrote in the Times and Seasons in 1840 that Joseph Smith was 17 when the vision took place. William, the prophet’s brother, claimed Joseph told the Smith family of the event the day after it occurred in 1823. (Interestingly, William recalled that Joseph was “was overcome, became unconscious, did not know how long he remained in this condition” but eventually “came to himself.” This closely matches what Joseph himself said in his official 1838 account of the event.) Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph’s mother, does not mention any vision or subsequent persecution in talking about her son’s religious experiences but does talk about the revivals in the area, dating them around 1824— as do William Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Both Cowdery and William Smith state that Joseph was inspired to pursue true religion after hearing the preaching of Methodist minister George Lane who arrived in the Palmyra area in 1824. Defenders dismiss these accounts claiming that they are late and the sources are unreliable due to age (too young, too old) etc. In my opinion though these accounts deserve consideration and the fact that they independently support each other on certain key facts makes them credible.
The 1820 date is further complicated by the fact that there appears to be little if any revival activity in immediate Palmyra area in 1820. The type of “religious excitement” Joseph refers in Palmyra seems more likely either before or after 1820. Conversion records from the local congregations support this, showing greater revival activity either around 1817 or not until 1823-24.
There were multiple accounts of the First Vision recorded by Joseph Smith (or a scribe)— which present substantially different versions of the event. The differences between the accounts are striking enough for some to question the accuracy of one or all of the accounts. It’s no surprise that apologists and defenders often write the differences off as minor and inconsequential oversights that are common when retelling a story.
The first account was recorded in 1832, twelve years after the official date for the event— with the last version being recorded in 1842 in what has become known as the Wentworth letter. The 1838 account was canonized as the “official” version of the religion’s foundational event.
The 1832 account was recorded in Smith’s own hand in what was to become Joseph’s first official history. It was chronologically closest to the event and differs from the official 1844 version in some key ways. First, there is no mention of the religious revivals being the impetus for Joseph’s searching for truth but instead he mentions becoming aware of his sins and praying for forgiveness. Joseph specifically mentions that he had become aware that the current Churches were in a state of apostasy BEFORE praying and does not mention this as something he learned in the grove. By contrast in the 1838 he says that “No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.”
By far though, the biggest discrepancy between the 1832 account and the official account is that Joseph only mentions “the Lord”, clearly Jesus Christ, appearing in the vision. There is no mention of two beings and there is no mention of the God the Father.
“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 attitude of calling upon the Lord 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 opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord and he spake unto me saying Joseph thy sins are forgiven thee. go thy 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 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 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 to visit them ac[c]ording to th[e]ir ungodliness and to bring to pass that which been spoken by the mouth of the prophets and Ap[o]stles behold and lo I come quickly as it [is] written of me in the cloud in the glory of my Father and my soul was filled with love and for many days I could rejoice with great Joy and the Lord was with me but [I] could find none that would believe the he[a]v[e]nly vision nevertheless I pondered these things in my heart”
The 1835 account was recorded in Joseph’s journal by scribe Warren Cowdery and recounts Joseph’s rehearsal of the First Vision to Joshua, a “Jewish minister.” Here unlike the 1832 account but similar to the official version Joseph says he went to pray to learn which church was true. In this account Joseph discusses being startled by hearing footsteps before he attempts to pray. Once he prays, one personage appears “in the midst of this pillar of flame” followed by another. The first being says Joseph’s sins were forgiven and testifies that Jesus was the Christ however neither personage is identified. Joseph also claims to have seen many angels in this vision. Read the account here.
A history of the church begun in 1838 included a version of the First Vision, which has become canonized by the LDS Church as official. It was not published until 1842. In this version Joseph goes to pray because he did know which church to join and had not considered they all could be wrong. “My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join.” As already mentioned this contradicts the 1832 account where he says after studying the Bible he had concluded that mankind “had apostatised from the true and liveing faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ…” before even going to the grove. In this version Joseph talks of difficultly speaking and being overpowered by a unseen force before praying rather than merely being startled by the sound of footsteps. Joseph claims the experience was so powerful it “seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.” Following his prayer and delivery, two distinct personages appear— and while not specifically identified in the account— the line “this is my Beloved Son hear Him” unmistakably implies they are God the Father and Jesus. In this account there is no mention of forgiveness of sin or angels. Joseph is told all the religious sects are “wrong”, “that all their creeds (are) an abomination in (God’s) sight” and that their religious “professors (are) all corrupt.” Joseph is instructed to join none of the churches.
What does it all mean?
Obviously that depends on your point of view. Here are a few of my observations:
First, it’s extremely surprising that the First Vision was not taught in the early Church and was not seen as the foundational event of Mormonism as it is now. This is the same event that President Gordon B. Hinckley was talking about when he said:
Our entire case as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rests on the validity of this glorious First Vision. It was the parting of the curtain to open this, the dispensation of the fulness of times. Nothing on which we base our doctrine, nothing we teach, nothing we live by is of greater importance than this initial declaration. I submit that if Joseph Smith talked with God the Father and His Beloved Son, then all else of which he spoke is true. This is the hinge on which turns the gate that leads to the path of salvation and eternal life. (Ensign article)
Why would such a miraculous and revealing theophany not be discussed openly (and often) from day one? There are a number of possibilities. Here are the likely scenarios:
1. The First Vision took place as the 1838 account claims, Joseph shared it and was persecuted for it as he said. For some unexplained reason though there is no personal account of Joseph sharing the vision and no account of the persecution— in any journal or newspaper before 1832.
2. The First Vision took place as the 1838 account claims, but Joseph did not share it as he claimed. This explains the lack of accounts talking about the experience or accounts of the persecution in any before 1832. In 1832 he began to tell various versions of the story with the last recorded in 1842.
3. Joseph saw his First Vision as a personal event and felt no need to share it with others. The mention of the forgiveness of sins mentioned in the 1832 account supports this.
4. Joseph made up the story later on and there was nothing to share in the 1820s.
Defenders maintain that Joseph did share the First Vision before the first published account in 1842 but there appears to be no contemporary evidence of such— either as an a recounting from Joseph or anyone else for that matter. By contrast the story of the gold plates and angel was discussed by both Mormon and anti-Mormon sources repeatedly and early on. Certainly one could expect similar contemporary evidence of the First Vision. In trying to explain the lack of early evidence apologists have claimed that perhaps Joseph resisted sharing the vision because of the persecution he experienced after speaking of it initially. If so this refutes Joseph’s own words in the 1838 account: “I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation.”
Really, one can really only speculate why Joseph took so long to share accounts of the First Vision. It’s odd that he doesn’t seem to have but claimed to. Certainly it seems likely though that anyone who had seen a vision of God would have recorded it, or at least have told others about it. If that vision taught them that God and Jesus were two separate beings— quite a revelation in 1820s New York— it’s hard to imagine that anyone could have kept quiet about it.
The next issue is the date of the event. Joseph claimed in the 1838 account that the vision was in 1820 but a number of other sources suggest that the event would have been more likely in 1824. Does this really matter? Perhaps. First, along with may other inconsistencies it makes the account(s) less credible. If Joseph has the first vision in spring 1824 the claim that Moroni appears to him in September of the previous year becomes problematic. An 1824 date puts the vision closer to the time Joseph began sharing stories of being visited by angels (Nephi/Moroni). Some suggest perhaps that the angel story occurred first and was initially the “first vision” in Smith’s religious narrative and that was then later evolved to as Joseph’s beliefs did.
But while the timing issues are significant— the clear evolution of the First Vision accounts is a far bigger concern in my view. Why did Joseph share different stories over the years?
These are some of the possibilities.
1) The event was as claimed in 1838 but Joseph didn’t understand it in 1820 and waited until he did to share/record it.
2) The actual event was exactly as claimed in the 1838 account but Joseph only shared certain details of the story in his initial tellings (1832, 1835)— making the 1838 account the most accurate and complete.
2) The actual event was different than what the 1838 account records and Joseph merely evolved his experience to match his current theology.
3) The event did not actually take place and was invented later.
As mentioned there are at least 4 significantly different accounts, either written or dictated by Smith, with some details in some versions and not in others. While people have been known to omit or include details in stories at different times it should be noted that what Smith leaves out are not mundane and inconsequential. And I am inclined to call some of them key elements too rather than ‘details.’ Whether or not there were two beings or just one, for example, is a pretty big ‘detail’. And that one of those separate and distinct beings was God the Father is huge— a fact that one would hardly forget to recount when recording such a momentous event. One would think that this detail above all others would be in the first recorded account because of it’s novelty. Also, if the whole purpose of Joseph going to pray was to find out which Church to join why didn’t Joseph share in earlier accounts that he’d been told all churches were wrong and to join none of them. Logically it makes more sense that Joseph would have shared these things especially in his initial sharing of the story.
Looking at the various accounts and details given in each, it appears likely that Joseph Smith didn’t merely remember his experience differently over the years but instead evolved the narrative. Why do I think this? Because the accounts show a clear progression—becoming more miraculous, impressive and dramatic with time. The first accounts of the vision are more vague, the latter more detailed. This is odd because memory doesn’t work like that. Memory fades and changes with time and over the years people often embellish memories— which is why accounts closer to an event are considered reliable. Such big omissions in early stories that appear later cause me to ask “Are these details more like what actually happened or the products of Joseph’s imagination and evolving theology?” and “Shouldn’t the earlier versions of the vision be considered likely more accurate?”
Certainly the fact that Joseph does not mention or identify God the Father in the early accounts is surprising. The 1832 account only mentions the “Lord”— clearly referring to Jesus. In 1835 Joseph says one being appeared followed by another but identifies neither. Remember, this was not an everyday event and the big facts would be nearly impossible to gloss over. How likely is it that Joseph Smith, after seeing God the Father, would neglect to share that specific fact……for eighteen years? For anyone— let alone a young unlearned farm boy— the vision alone would be an amazing event. Learning that God the Father is separate and distinct from Jesus in a predominantly Trinitarian world, would be mind-blowingly huge. It’s not the type of thing one would forget to mention especially when writing an official history— and yet the 1832 account (no Father) was written for inclusion in an early history of the Church. Unbelievably, the 1835 history of the Church written by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery does not mention the First Vision at all either.
Looking at Joseph’s teachings on the nature of God between 1820 and the 1840s is useful in making sense of these accounts and in doing so it quickly becomes clear the First Vision accounts mirror Joseph Smith’s fairly dramatic theological evolution over this time. While the actual events of any vision wouldn’t have changed over time but it seems likely that the story did in order to bring it in harmony with Smith’s current views on God.
Joseph’s early view of God as seen in the Book of Mormon and other early sources is as some argue essentially Trinitarian (some say Modalist). The 1832 First Vision account reflects this sort of belief. In this account a single physical manifestation of God— “the Lord” appears and communicates with Joseph and the idea of two separate beings is nowhere in this account. By 1835, the two beings which are not specifically identified (possibly God and Jesus????) show the beginning of a shift in Smith’s theology. Lectures on Faith written and complied by Sidney Rigdon, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery between 1834 and 1835 define God the Father as a ‘personage of spirit’ and Jesus as ‘who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle’ moves closer towards distinct beings but still favors a more Trinitarian view. The mind of the Father and Son, ‘which Mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son’ is how the Holy Ghost is described. By the late 1830s however Joseph’s view of God had evolved even further. The 1838 First Vision account clearly identifies the two beings in the grove as the Father and Son with the “this is my Beloved Son hear Him” line. A series of changes to the text of the BoM in the 1837 and then again in 1840 edition also more clearly support the idea that Smith now saw God the Father and Jesus Christ as separate physical beings.
1 Nephi 13:40— 1830 edition:
“… These last records … shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Savior … “
1 Nephi 13:40— Modern Version:
“…These records… shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the
Mosiah 15
How Christ is both the Father and the Son—He shall make intercession and bear the transgressions of his people—They and all the holy prophets are his seed—He bringeth to pass the resurrection—Little children have eternal life. About 148 B.C.
1 And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.
2 And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son—
3 The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son—
4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.
5 And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people.
| 1830 Version |
Modern Version |
|
P. 25
Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh.
|
I Nephi 11:18
Behold, the virgin whom thou seest, is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.
|
|
P. 25
And an angel said to me, “Behold, the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!”
|
I Nephi 11:21
And an angel said to me, “Behold, the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!
|
|
P. 26
The Everlasting Father was judged of the world; and I saw and bear record
|
I Nephi 11:32
The Son of the Everlasting Father was judged of the world; and I saw and bear record
|
|
P. 32
These last records . . . .shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father, and the Savior
|
I Nephi 13:40
These last records . . . .shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior
|
And finally by the 1844 Joseph is teaching the plurality of Gods which is of course more in line with the 1838 account of the First Vision than his earlier.
Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the first vision? Some people think so — or at least that his claims were a influenced by what others were claiming around him. See some of the evidence here.
Read more on the First Vision here and here as well.