The Book of Mormon Case Against the First Vision

“Our whole strength rests on the validity of that vision.
It either occurred or it did not occur. If it did not, then this work is a fraud.
If it did, then it is the most important and wonderful work under the heavens.”
—Gordon B. Hinckley on Joseph Smith’s First Vision,
October 2002 General Conference

As far as official origin stories go, ours is pretty good. A young boy, confused by the competing doctrines of his day (or seeking mercy from the Lord), retired to a secluded grove and prayed to God for direction (or forgiveness). On that cool spring morning the radiant sun beamed, bees hummed, sweet birds sang, music rang, and in a remarkable turn, God and His spiritual and biological son, Jesus Christ, appeared to the young boy. This most magnificent of events became known as Joseph Smith’s First Vision and marked the beginning of the great restoration of Christ’s gospel, church and priesthood in the “dispensation of the fullness of times.”

It’s the stuff of legend.

The First Vision is the source of many of our most moving pieces of song, poetry, art and merchandise. “O, How Lovely Was the Morning” is a beautiful hymn. Paintings depicting God and Jesus hovering above Joseph Smith are as ubiquitous as paintings of Jesus Himself.  You’ll find bronze sculptures of Joseph Smith on temple grounds. You can buy miniature sculptures of the First Vision at Deseret Book for $200 and framed prints for $500-$1,000.  If that’s a bit too rich for your blood, you can buy a First Vision keychain for $15 or a First Vision medallion for $13.  Need something to keep your kids occupied in Sacrament Meeting? You can buy the First Vision activity book for $4. The First Vision isn’t just theologically important, but economically as well. Given Joseph Smith’s propensity to engage in money-making schemes, I’m sure he would approve.

As a young missionary in Spain, I taught the First Vision as part of the first discussion. Our mission president required each missionary to memorize all six discussions verbatim and then recite them to his assistants in a role-playing scenario. (It was also understood that those missionaries who successfully “passed off” the discussions would have a better shot at leadership opportunities.) Apparently, this role-play was to somehow approximate a discussion with investigators. I only memorized the first three (and never advanced past a three-month stint as District Leader), but it was all the same because I only taught the fourth, fix and six discussions…twice? I had one investigator join the church during my mission, so I taught them at least once. But beyond that, I don’t remember. And I certainly couldn’t tell you what’s in them. It was all the same to me because I rejected the idea of memorization, which seemed antithetical to teaching by the Spirit. (They were called “discussions,” not “recitations.”) Even though it’s been thirty years since I left on my mission, I still remember that powerful line of God the Father introducing His Son, Jesus, in Spanish: “Uno de ellos me habló, llamándome por mi nombre y dijó, señalado al otro, ‘esto es mi hijo amado, escúchalo!‘” We were then instructed to tell investigators,

“Because he saw and spoke with the resurrected savior, Joseph Smith is a powerful witness of Jesus Christ. Through him, God revealed the truths of the plan of salvation, including the divine mission of Jesus Christ.”

This is the claim on which Mormonism and the restoration of Christ’s church and gospel hang. But is it true? Did Joseph Smith really see God the Father and Jesus Christ on a cool spring morning in 1820? Because of the First Vision, which Joseph F. Smith said was “the greatest event that has ever occurred in the world, since the resurrection of the Son of God,” we have endowed Joseph Smith with unique prophetic insight and infallibility.  We treat his words as God’s words and millions of people govern their lives based on his doctrines and revelations. But what if he didn’t tell the truth? Do we have a way of knowing? The answer may surprise you. If we accept the recorded words of Jesus Christ in the Book of Mormon at face value, then yes, we can know with absolute certainty that he did not tell the truth about the First Vision.

IN THE BEGINNING

As someone who grew up in the Church, I never had a reason to doubt Joseph’s familiar1838 account.  On the few occasions I taught it on my mission I testified it was true. It’s so powerful that I have seen people shed tears when bearing testimony of it. Even after my “faith crisis” and separation from the corporate LDS church I remained a True Believer. I was a T.B.M. without the M. (“T.B.M” is an acronym for “True Believing Mormon.”) I made impassioned defenses of the official narrative on LDS-themed blogs and in speaking with others. I was all-in. So, when I had the chance to visit Manchester and Palmyra several years ago and see the Sacred Grove with my own eyes, I jumped.

Having spent most of my life in Southern California and Utah County where nature is shades of brown for eight months of the year, I was not prepared for the endless, rolling green hills of upstate New York. It took my breath away.  It looked like Ireland. I had never seen so much green in my life. Our first stop was in Palmyra, which is the kind of charming small town I’ve always wanted to live in. There we visited E.B. Grandin’s print shop where I had a very pleasant conversation with a kindly elderly gentleman/missionary there who explained the Book of Mormon printing process to me.  As I recall, he bore witness to the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith. I appreciated his sincerity and willingness to take some time with me, however brief it was.

We then visited the Smith homestead and took a walk through the Sacred Grove. My first impression of the grove was how small it was. I was expecting a large, densely wooded area with specks of sunlight breaking through a canopy of trees like I had seen in the First Vision paintings. It was nothing like that. In fairness, it was early spring and many tree branches were still bare. Maybe it’s a different experience in during summer months. Despite feeling like my faith was sufficient for some sort of spiritual manifestation, I had no expectations upon taking my first step on the narrow, winding path. It was all for the best because nothing happened. In the end it was a quick, quiet stroll down a quaint path on an overcast New York afternoon. I was fine with that. I left Palmyra with my belief unshaken that God and Jesus appeared to Joseph Smith in 1820.

WHEN CONSISTENCY FAILS

What I didn’t know at the time, and certainly not during my mission, is that the familiar 1838 account of Joseph Smith’s First Vision published in the Times and Seasons in 1842, and later canonized in the Pearl of Great Price in 1851, is markedly different from the original 1832 version penned by Joseph Smith himself. According to sources, Joseph dictated his 1838 history to James Mulholland with his secretary, Robert B. Thompson taking over at some point, but I don’t believe that’s the whole story.  My suspicion is that a combination W.W. Phelps, Sidney Rigdon, and Frederick G. Williams wrote the final draft. It’s far too eloquent for Joseph Smith to have dictated or written. I don’t know if most lay LDS people are aware of, or are concerned with, the discrepancies in the various accounts, but scholarship has grappled with the issue since it was first made widely known in the 1960s. Attempts to harmonize the nine known accounts have led to a number of very creative theories and hypotheses. If you’ve found this blog, you’re probably already familiar with the 1832 original. But if not, here’s an excerpt,

“…I cried unto the Lord for mercy for there was none else to whom I could go and to 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 pillar of fire 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 crucified for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life.'” (Emphasis added.)

This is very clearly an encounter with Jesus and more or less consistent with scriptural theophany. Joseph uses the familiar language of scripture, such Stephen’s martyrdom account in Acts 7:56 (The heavens being opened), a pillar of fire like the noon-day sun that Lehi saw (1 Nephi 1:6), and like Mary before him, he “pondered these things in [his] heart.” (Luke 2:19). But for some reason, he never made it publicly known.

Beginning in 1835, Joseph began to introduce new elements into the narrative.  His new purpose in going to the Lord was determine which sect to join rather than an appeal for mercy. “Information,” he says, “was what I most desired at this time, and with a fixed determination to obtain it.”  He adds darkness, unseen powers and footsteps, the inability to speak, and most importantly, God the Father,

“…another personage soon appeared like unto the first, he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee, he testified unto me that Jesus Christ is the son of God.”

If I’m reading this correctly, it’s God the Father that forgives Joseph, rather than Jesus forgiving Joseph as we read in the 1832 version. That seems significant. There’s also an interesting side note to the 1835 account. I don’t want to get too far off into the weeds, but I found this fascinating. John Dee (1527-1608) was a mystic and alchemist who served as a counselor and court astronomer to Elizabeth I.  In his book A True and Faithful Relation, Dee writes,

“All my life time I had spent in learning … and I found (at length) that neither any man living, nor any Book I could yet meet withal, was able to teach me truths I desired and long for: And therefore I concluded with my self, to make intercession and prayer to the giver of wisdom and all good things, to send me such wisdom, as I might know the natures of his creature. And also enjoy means to use them to his honour and glory.”

This should sound familiar as Joseph reportedly said the best way to obtain truth and wisdom, “is not to ask it from books, but to go to God in prayer, and obtain divine teaching.” In one his unpublished journals, Dee wrote, “What good Counsell the Apostle James giveth, saying, ‘Si quis vestrum careat sapientia, postulat a Deo, &c’; that is, ‘If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of God.'” Dee also worked with a scryer; a convicted criminal named Edward Kelley. Kelley would look into a stone that Dee described as “big as an egg: most bright, clere, and glorious,” and Dee would scribe Kelley’s revelations. I don’t know if Joseph Smith knew of John Dee, his application of James 1:5, or Kelley’s stone. Perhaps he did. I think it’s more a case of two visionary men engaging in the long hermetic and alchemical tradition. But I leave the door open in the event new evidence emerges.

At any rate, in 2013 the Church addressed the First Vision controversy by writing,

“The various accounts of the First Vision tell a consistent story, though naturally they differ in emphasis and detail. Historians expect that when an individual retells an experience in multiple settings to different audiences over many years, each account will emphasize various aspects of the experience and contain unique details. Indeed, differences similar to those in the First Vision accounts exist in the multiple scriptural accounts of Paul’s vision on the road to Damascus and the Apostles’ experience on the Mount of Transfiguration. Yet despite the differences, a basic consistency remains across all the accounts of the First Vision.” (Emphasis added.)

Firstly, and with respect to the Church, there is a significant difference between Jesus appearing alone in the 1832 account and God and Jesus appearing together as two distinct beings in the 1838 account. It calls into the question of the very nature and composition of the Mormon Godhead. Is it Trinitarian, Binitarian, Modalistic? Monotheistic, polytheistic or henotheistic? Is the Mormon God “Elohim” or Jehovah?  Does Jesus operate on His own authority, or does He have the Father’s authority via “Divine Investiture?” (A doctrine invented by James Talmage in 1916 in attempt to reconcile the inconsistent Godhead found in Mormon scripture.) Who is the God we worship and have faith in? It’s a very big deal.

Secondly, what motivation does Joseph Smith have, as an ostensible witness to God the Father and Jesus Christ, to “emphasize various aspects” of his vision to different audiences? I can’t imagine a scenario in which he would have reason to “emphasize” Jesus in his handwritten account, but two individuals in his official history. If God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him in 1820, I suspect that experience would be seared into his memory. Debates over the nature of the Godhead have been at the forefront of Christianity since the patristic era and have continued through the Reformation to the present today. Joseph Smith could have hypothetically, from the very beginning, established a clear and consistent theology. But he did not. And I think it’s fair to ask why.

Thirdly, comparing Joseph Smith to Paul is a specious argument. The different accounts of his conversion in Acts (9:3-8, 22:6-11, 26:13-19) can easily be explained by the fact that Paul did not write Acts. Luke and Acts were written by the same anonymous individual and are commonly grouped together as “Luke-Acts” in academic circles. This anonymous author acknowledges at the beginning of “Luke” that he was not an eyewitness but writes the things “as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses” (Luke 1:2). At best Luke-Acts is a second-hand account.

The same holds true for the Mount of Transfiguration accounts. Since the Gospels weren’t written by Christ’s original apostles and thus not eyewitness accounts, we can easily account for the discrepancies. All four Gospels are anonymously written to different audiences from different cultural and religious backgrounds.  “Matthew” writes to a group of Jewish Christians familiar with the Hebrew scriptures. “Mark” may have been writing to Gentile converts in Rome. “Luke-Acts” is written to a Grecian named Theophilus. “John” may have been written for a Johannine community separated from the larger Christian community. Further, the Gospels are not historical biographies of Jesus, nor are they meant to be. They’re “Gospels,” or the “Good News.” Each Gospel is its respective author’s interpretation, or what Paula Frederickson called “advertisement,” of the Christian message. We should expect some basic inconsistencies because we have different authors, not to mention an unknown number of editors and revisions to the original texts, which weren’t written until many decades after Jesus’ ministry.

Joseph Smith, on the other hand, is the primary source for all accounts and bears sole responsibility for his claims. We can’t blame second-hand accounts, scribal errors or later revisions, at least not for the 1832 and 1838 versions. Whether it was one or two personages, it is a matter of historical fact that there are no references to God the Father and Jesus Christ appearing in any church-published material during the first dozen years of the church. LDS historian James Allen writes,

“As far as Mormon literature is concerned, there was apparently no reference to Joseph Smith’s first vision in any published material in the 1830’s. Joseph Smith’s history, which was begun in 1838, was not published until it ran serially in the Times and Seasons in 1842. The famous ‘Wentworth Letter,’ which contained a much less detailed account of the vision, appeared March 1, 1842, in the same periodical. Introductory material to the Book of Mormon, as well as publicity about it, told of Joseph Smith’s obtaining the gold plates and of angelic visitations, but nothing was printed that remotely suggested earlier visitations. In 1833 the Church published the Book of Commandments, forerunner to the present Doctrine and Covenants, and again no reference was made to Joseph’s first vision, although several references were made to the Book of Mormon and the circumstances of its origin. The first regular periodical to be published by the Church was ‘The Evening and Morning Star,’ but its pages reveal no effort to tell the story of the first vision to its readers. Nor do the pages of the Latter-day Saints ‘Messenger and Advocate,’ printed in Kirtland, Ohio, from October 1834 to September 1836. In this newspaper Oliver Cowdery, who was second only to Joseph Smith in the early organization of the Church, published a series of letters dealing with the origin of the Church. These letters were written with the approval of Joseph Smith, but they contained no mention of any vision prior to those connected with the Book of Mormon. In 1835 the Doctrine and Covenants was printed at Kirtland, Ohio, and its preface declared that it contained ‘the leading items of religion which we have professed to believe.’ Included in the book were the ‘Lectures on Faith,’ a series of seven lectures which had been prepared for the School of the Prophets in Kirtland in 1834-35. It is interesting to note that, in demonstrating the doctrine that the Godhead consists of two separate personages, no mention was made of Joseph Smith having seen them, nor was any reference made to the first vision in any part of the publication. The ‘Times and Seasons’ began publication in 1839, but, as indicated above, the story of the vision was not told in its pages until 1842.” (The Significance of Joseph Smith’s ‘First Vision’ in Mormon Thought, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, 3131-32. Emphasis added.)

I’m pretty sure I know why it’s missing. The short answer is that the story hadn’t yet developed.  We’re going to deep dive into the long answer. While the 1832 version is essentially consistent with the scriptures, the 1838 is not. In the Book of Mormon, Hebrew Bible and New Testament, never do two distinct and separate individuals or personages known as “God the Father” and “Jesus Christ” appear to man or woman at the same time. In the exceptionally rare event that God does appear to man, He is alone. There’s a simple explanation. The Eternal God revealed Himself in the person of Jesus Christ. In other words, Jesus is God. The God. Again, the Book of Mormon title page informs the reader that its purpose is to “convince the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ—the Eternal God.” There is only One God. (Alma 11:26:31)

So, what did happen?  There’s a lot to cover and this post is probably four times longer than it needs to be because I like to show my work, my reasoning, and how I arrive at my conclusions. I thank you for taking the time to read it.

THE MINISTRATION OF ANGELS

As earliest accounts tend to be the most accurate, I think the true story of Joseph’s divine encounter is found in the Church’s founding document, the Articles and Covenants of the Church of Christ adopted on April 6, 1830, and later revised and published in 1835 as Section 20 of the Doctrine and Covenants,

“After it was truly manifested unto this first elder (Joseph Smith) that he had received a remission of his sins, he was entangled again in the vanities of the world; But after repenting, and humbling himself sincerely, through faith, God ministered unto him by an holy angel, whose countenance was as lightning, and whose garments were pure and white above all other whiteness. And gave unto him commandments which inspired him; And gave him power from on high, by the means which were before prepared, to translate the Book of Mormon; Which contains a record of a fallen people, and the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles and to the Jews also; Which was given by inspiration, and is confirmed to others by the ministering of angels, and is declared unto the world by them.”

Had Joseph seen God and Jesus in 1820, this would have been the document in which to make it known. For such a monumental event, it’s conspicuously absent. This ministration of angels, however, is consistent with what we find in the Book of Mormon. Throughout all of scripture, we read of God communicating with mankind in four primary ways: the holy spirit, dreams/visions, an audible voice, and via messengers, commonly called “angels.” The Hebrew “mal’ākh” and the Greek “angelos” both refer to “messengers,” who are usually, but not exclusively, divine. (“Malachi” is rooted in mal’ākh and isn’t a proper name). I believe this angelic encounter is what happened and there is plenty of scriptural precedent for such an event.

Many of the most righteous men and prophets of the Book of Mormon never claimed to see Jesus before His condescension, but we do have records of their angelic encounters, including King Benjamin (Mosiah 3:2), Alma (Alma 8:14-15), Amulek (Alma 8:20, 10:7), Alma the Younger and the Sons of Mosiah (Mosiah 27:11), etc. (In some cases, the voice of the Lord comes, such as with Enos [Enos 1:5-8] and Nephi, son of Helaman [3 Nephi 1:13-14].)  We read in Moroni 7 that from the beginning God has used angels to relay information to man and assist in His work,

“For behold, God knowing all things, being from everlasting to everlasting, behold, he sent angels to minister unto the children of men, to make manifest concerning the coming of Christ; and in Christ there should come every good thing. And God also declared unto prophets, by his own mouth, that Christ should come…Wherefore, by the ministering of angels, and by every word which proceeded forth out of the mouth of God men began to exercise faith in Christ…

“And because [Christ hath ascended], my beloved brethren, have miracles ceased? Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither have angels ceased to minister unto the children of men. For behold, they are subject unto him, to minister according to the word of his command, showing themselves unto them of strong faith and a firm mind in every form of godliness. And the office of their ministry is to call men unto repentance, and to fulfil and to do the work of the covenants of the Father, which he hath made unto the children of men, to prepare the way among the children of men, by declaring the word of Christ unto the chosen vessels of the Lord, that they may bear testimony of him. And by so doing, the Lord God prepareth the way that the residue of men may have faith in Christ, that the Holy Ghost may have place in their hearts, according to the power thereof; and after this manner bringeth to pass the Father, the covenants which he hath made unto the children of men.” (In 1839 Joseph Smith rejected the idea of the Holy Ghost (the “paraclete“) dwelling in one’s heart (represented as The Father and the Son in John 14:23) as “an old sectarian notion and is false.”  He introduced a new doctrine in which God and Jesus appears to man personally and frequently. This false doctrine became known as the “Second Comforter.”  My post on the subject is currently in the revision stage, so expect it in the next month or so.)

Mormon wasn’t the only person to teach this principle. Centuries earlier Alma likewise taught,

“And after God had appointed that these things should come unto man, behold, then he saw that it was expedient that man should know concerning the things whereof he had appointed unto them; Therefore, he sent angels to converse with them, who caused men to behold of his glory. And they began from that time forth to call on his name; therefore God conversed with men (via angels), and made known unto them the plan of redemption, which had been prepared from the foundation of the world” (Alma 12: 28-30).

These “chosen vessels” were the High Priests we read about in the Book of Mormon who were called to “teach his commandments unto the children of men.” (Alma 13:6.) Alma continues,

“Now is the time to repent, for the day of salvation draweth nigh; yea, and the voice of the Lord, by the mouth of angels, doth declare it unto all nations; yea, doth declare it, that they may have glad tidings of great joy; yea, and he doth sound these glad tidings among all his people, yea, even to them that are scattered abroad upon the face of the earth; wherefore they have come unto us…For behold, angels are declaring it unto many at this time in our land; and this is for the purpose of preparing the hearts of the children of men to receive his word at the time of his coming in his glory. And now we only wait to hear the joyful news declared unto us by the mouth of angels, of his coming; for the time cometh, we know not how soon. Would to God that it might be in my day; but let it be sooner or later, in it I will rejoice. And it shall be made known unto just and holy men, by the mouth of angels, at the time of his coming, that the words of our fathers may be fulfilled, according to that which they have spoken concerning him, which was according to the spirit of prophecy which was in them.” (Alma 13:21-22, 24-27).

This is the pattern, just as it will be in the future. One of the seemingly forgotten aspects of the Book of Mormon is the ministry of the Three Nephites. If they exist, and I believe they do, they have pretty big role to play,

“And it shall come to pass, when the Lord seeth fit in his wisdom that they shall minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them. And they are as the angels of God, and if they shall pray unto the Father in the name of Jesus, they can show themselves unto whatsoever man it seemeth them good. Therefore, great and marvelous works shall be wrought by them, before the great and coming day when all people must surely stand before the judgment-seat of Christ; Yea even among the Gentiles shall there be a great and marvelous work wrought by them, before that judgment day” (3 Nephi 28:29-32).

What is this great and marvelous work? Beats me. I wish I knew. Whatever it is, be it the “convincing power of God” in them, translation of the brass plates or sealed portion, or something else, it fits the pattern. It’s by angels (and by the Book of Mormon) that He goes about fulfilling His covenants, which process is underway,

“And now behold, I say unto you that when the Lord shall see fit, in his wisdom, that these sayings shall come unto the Gentiles according to his word, then ye may know that the covenant which the Father hath made with the children of Israel, concerning their restoration to the lands of their inheritance, is already beginning to be fulfilled. And ye may know that the words of the Lord, which have been spoken by the holy prophets, shall all be fulfilled; and ye need not say that the Lord delays his coming unto the children of Israel. And ye need not imagine in your hearts that the words which have been spoken are vain, for behold, the Lord will remember his covenant which he hath made unto his people of the house of Israel. And when ye shall see these sayings coming forth among you, then ye need not any longer spurn at the doings of the Lord, for the sword of his justice is in his right hand; and behold, at that day, if ye shall spurn at his doings he will cause that it shall soon overtake you.” (3 Nephi 29:1-4)

The angel that came to Joseph and delivered Jesus’ sayings in the Book of Mormon was Moroni, not Nephi as some have claimed in recent years. In Ether 5 Moroni directly addresses the Book of Mormon translator, presumably Joseph Smith, instructing him not to translate the sealed portion. (I wrote about this chapter, which I suggest could be a contemporary insertion into the text.) It was never supposed to be about Joseph Smith, or a “restoration,” or preparing people for the “Second Coming” of Jesus. The coming forth of the Book of Mormon was to fulfill the covenants God made with Israel, particularly Lehi’s posterity so they would know who they are and come to know Jesus. Has anyone heard about them in General Conference in the last fifty years? Or ever?  The first LDS missionaries were sent to reclaim them, but during that trip, Parley P. Pratt stopped by Kirtland to see his old friend and mentor, Sidney Rigdon, and the rest, as they say, is history.

I know many good and sincere people believe two beings appeared to Joseph. They might suggest that the ministering of angels doesn’t necessarily preclude a personal visitation from God the Father and/or Jesus Christ. I concede that’s true. The Brother of Jared saw the preincarnate Jesus (whom Moroni referred to as “God”). Lehi (1 Nephi 1:8), Nephi (1 Nephi 11: 7-14), Jacob (2 Nephi 11:3) and King Lamoni (Alma 19:13) had visionary or ecstatic experiences in which they saw Jesus. Moroni saw the resurrected Jesus and spoke with him “face to face.” (Ether 12:39).  In the Hebrew Bible Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Isaiah and others likewise encountered deity. It certainly happened, but it’s relatively rare. These people also had one thing in common and it’s important: they are Israelites. The Brother of Jared isn’t an “Israelite,” but the record of his people was included in the Book of Mormon “to show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers.”  The Jaredite people are among the Israelites’ forefathers.  Israel, as the covenant people, has a unique role to play. This is why the distinction between Israelites and Gentiles, and how God interacts with both, is so important.

YES, WE ARE STILL GENTILES

In my previous post I made the claim the Latter-Day Saints are the Gentiles of the Book of Mormon. Since I never met a dead horse I didn’t like to beat, let’s talk about it some. The LDS Bible dictionary suggests that in Book of Mormon “Gentile” is a spiritual designation,

“As used in the scriptures, Gentiles has several meanings. Sometimes it designates people of non-Israelite lineage, sometimes people of non-Jewish lineage, and sometimes nations that are without the gospel, even though there may be some Israelite blood among the people. This latter usage is especially characteristic of the word as used in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants.” (Emphasis added)

This interpretation is demonstrably incorrect. “Gentile” is always a racial/ethnic designation in the Book of Mormon. The House of Israel and the Gentiles are always treated as two distinct people groups. But the Bible dictionary interpretation is necessary because very early in the Church the Saints forewent their Gentile identity in favor of an Israelite identity.  John L. Brooke noted,

“…the logic of restoration rested on Old Testament authority, with the Latter-Day Saints literally reestablishing the circumstances of the ancient Israelites.  In the church’s first years the Mormons considered themselves gentiles taking up the ancient covenant, but by the end of 1832 (perhaps because the missions among the ‘Lamanite’ Indians were failing) they began to declare themselves the literal descendants of the Israelites, as the Vermont New Israelites had done three decades before.” (The Refiner’s Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, p. 214)

We see this new identity in Joseph’s revelations from that time period. When Independence was established as “Zion,” Joseph wrote there should be a “line running directly between Jew and Gentile” (D&C 57:4, 1831). A later revelation identified the Elders as “sons of Moses and Aaron.” (D&C 84:32, 1832).  In anticipation of Zion’s Camp in the summer of 1834, yet another revelation informed the Saints that Joseph Smith would be a new “Moses” and that the Saints were “the children of Israel, and of the seed of Abraham” who would be led out of bondage just as their fathers had. (D&C 103:17, 1834)

The Gentile identity, however, emerged once again in 1836. In the Kirtland Temple Dedicatory prayer, ostensibly written by Revelation, the Saints “are identified with the Gentiles” and then adds, addressing God, “But thou knowest that thou hast a great love for the children of Jacob.” (D&C 109: 60-61, 1836) The implication is that the Saints were a distinct people group from the Israelites, which is consistent with the Book of Mormon view. 

The Israelite identity, however, moved west to Salt Lake City. When a correspondent from the Jewish Telegraph Agency visited Salt Lake City in 1928, he reported that it was “the only place in the world where Christians call themselves Jews and Jews are often called ‘Gentiles.'” Today the Latter-Day Saints claim to be Ephraimites. Joseph Fielding Smith wrote that the “majority of the people who have been first to receive the gospel and priesthood of the latter-day dispensation, are descendants of some of the house of Ephraim” and “the great majority of those who become members of the Church are literal descendants of Abraham through Ephraim, son of Joseph.” Is there a religious equivalent of stolen valor?

What I find most amusing about the idea that the LDS are Ephraimites is that there could not exist a more generic Gentilic name than Joseph Smith. It’s not just the name, however. We know Joseph Smith is a Gentile because population geneticist Ugo Perero collected DNA samples from known Smith descendants and determined that he was of Irish descent and possibly related to the Irish Warlord, Niall of the Nine Hostages.  Nephi writes about the Gentiles fleeing to the promised land (1 Nephi 13) and Joseph and Emma Smith shared seven common ancestors who came to America on the Mayflower. They are gentiles through and through. This is not an unknown problem in LDS studies. The Welsh theologian W.D. Davies noted “the difficulty of finding a verifiable physical genealogical connection between Jews and such obviously British and Scandinavian figures as peopled the early Mormon movement.”  Indeed, Smith, Cowdery, Snow, Pratt, Kimball, Wight, Whitmer, Phelps, Harris, Whitney, Knight, Kimball, Rigdon and Young are Gentile/European surnames. We aren’t Israelites. We never have been, and we never will be.

GOD’S MANIFESTATION TO THE GENTILES

The Book of Mormon title page informs us that God manifests Himself “to all nations” and I think there’s a natural inclination to interpret “manifest” as a personal appearance, but that’s not always the case. God can, and does, manifest Himself in many ways. Lehi was the first to speak on the subject,

“And after they had slain the Messiah, who should come, and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles.” (1 Nephi 10:11)

Later, the angel reiterated to Nephi what his father previously said,

“…the words of the Lamb shall be made known in the records of thy seed (Book of Mormon), as well as in the records of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (New Testament); wherefore they both shall be established in one; for there is one God and one Shepherd over all the earth. And the time cometh that he shall manifest himself unto all nations, both unto the Jews and also unto the Gentiles; and after he has manifested himself unto the Jews and also unto the Gentiles, then he shall manifest himself unto the Gentiles and also unto the Jews, and the last shall be first, and the first shall be last. And it shall come to pass, that if the Gentiles shall hearken unto the Lamb of God in that day that he shall manifest himself unto them in word, and also in power, in very deed, unto the taking away of their stumbling blocks—and harden not their hearts against the Lamb of God, they shall be numbered among the seed of thy father; yea, they shall be numbered among the house of Israel; and they shall be a blessed people upon the promised land forever; they shall be no more brought down into captivity; and the house of Israel shall no more be confounded.” (There’s a very unfortunate chapter break between 1 Nephi 13:42 and 1 Nephi 14:1-2.)

The angel couldn’t be clearer: in addition to Holy Ghost, God manifests Himself to us, the Gentiles, “in word, and also in power, and in very deed.” Noticeably absent? In person. I believe word, power and deed refer to specifically to the Book of Mormon. Moroni writes as much,

“And this [Jaredite record] cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles (Mormons), that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done. Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written.” (Ether 2:11-12)

Written records are one of the ways God manifests His power. Earlier Alma said of the brass plates,

“And now remember, my son, that God has entrusted you with these things, which are sacred, which he has kept sacred, and also which he will keep and preserve for a wise purpose in him, that he may show forth his power unto future generations…For he will fulfil all his promises which he shall make unto you, for he has fulfilled his promises which he has made unto our fathers. For he promised unto them that he would preserve these things for a wise purpose in him, that he might show forth his power unto future generations. (Alma 37:14, 17-18)

I love this internal consistency. I find it highly improbable that Joseph Smith inserted these consistent smaller details, much if dictating the Book of Mormon off the top of his head. It is equally improbable he would write the following words of Jesus considering his First Vision claims contradict them.  As we read these verses, keep in mind that Joseph Smith and Latter-Day Saints are Gentiles. Here’s how you can know there was no First Vision,

“And verily, I say unto you (Nephites) again that the other tribes (of Israel) hath the Father separated from them (the Jews); and it is because of their (Jews) iniquity that they know not of them. And verily I say unto you (Nephites), that ye are they of whom I said: Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. And they understood me not, for they supposed it had been the Gentiles; for they understood not that the Gentiles should be converted through their preaching. And they understood me not that I said they shall hear my voice; and they understood me not that the Gentiles should not at any time hear my voice—that I should not manifest myself unto them save it were by the Holy Ghost. But behold, ye (Nephites/House of Israel) have both heard my voice, and seen me; and ye are my sheep, and ye are numbered among those whom the Father hath given me. And verily, verily, I say unto you that I have other sheep, which are not of this land, neither of the land of Jerusalem, neither in any parts of that land round about whither I have been to minister. For they of whom I speak are they who have not as yet heard my voice; neither have I at any time manifested myself unto them. But I have received a commandment of the Father that I shall go unto them, and that they shall hear my voice, and shall be numbered among my sheep, that there may be one fold and one shepherd; therefore I go to show myself unto them. And I command you that ye shall write these sayings after I am gone, that if it so be that my people at Jerusalem, they who have seen me and been with me in my ministry, do not ask the Father in my name, that they may receive a knowledge of you by the Holy Ghost, and also of the other tribes whom they know not of, that these sayings which ye shall write shall be kept and shall be manifested unto the Gentiles, that through the fulness of the Gentiles, the remnant of their seed (the Jews), who shall be scattered forth upon the face of the earth because of their unbelief, may be brought in, or may be brought to a knowledge of me, their Redeemer. And then will I gather them in from the four quarters of the earth; and then will I fulfil the covenant which the Father hath made unto all the people of the house of Israel. And blessed are the Gentiles, because of their belief in me, in and of the Holy Ghost, which witnesses unto them of me and of the Father. Behold, because of their belief in me, saith the Father, and because of the unbelief of you, O house of Israel, in the latter day shall the truth come unto the Gentiles, that the fulness of these things shall be made known unto them.” (3 Nephi 15:20-24, 3 Nephi 16:1-7. There’s a very unfortunate chapter break in our modern editions.)

In my opinion this is one of the most important passages in the Book of Mormon. Here, in unmistakable language, Jesus says the Gentiles should “not at any time hear his voice” and that he “should not manifest [Himself] to the Gentiles save it be power the of the holy ghost,” reiterating what Lehi and the angel said nearly 600 years earlier. If the Book of Mormon is what it claims, then the First Vision didn’t happen. It likely explains Joseph’s evolving narrative, contradictory revelations, and inconsistent theology. (It’s hard to keep straight the details of a story that didn’t happen.) I believe it also explains why none of the LDS leadership has claimed an audience with Jesus. It also means all the self-styled prophets in the Mormon periphery who claim to have seen Jesus or have been in His presence haven’t. (Denver Snuffer, Rob Smith, Phil Davis, Pure Revelations, etc.)

Over the past three or four years I have presented these verses to people who agree that the Mormons are the Gentiles of the Book of Mormon. When confronted with Jesus’ words in book they profess belief in, the cognitive dissonance predictably sets in. Leon Festinger, who coined the term “cognitive dissonance,” observed the phenomenon is his book, When Prophecy Fails,

“A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree, and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.

We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks. But man’s resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.” (pp. 1-2. Emphasis added.)

I have experienced this firsthand. The First Vision is key to Joseph Smith’s prophetic calling. Many people are wholly invested in the Restoration. There are individuals who still hope for Zion. To consider the possibility he didn’t see God is a fatal blow to one’s faith in Joseph. (Though I would argue that any faith in man deserves to be destroyed.) Rather than accept the words of Jesus Christ and adjust one’s beliefs, I’m invariably met with accusations of “pharisaism,” “apostasy,” and “putting God in a box.” But these are not my words. These are Jesus’ words found in “the most correct book.”

Some individuals have tried to work around the problem by suggesting that “by the power of the Holy Ghost” is a personal appearance. That can’t be, however, because Jesus says, “but you have both heard my voice and seen me,” meaning there’s a difference between the Holy Ghost and a personal appearance. When that explanation fails, they try to explain why Jesus didn’t really mean what He said, though they can’t muster a coherent argument explaining what He actually meant. Most frequently I see appeals to Joseph’s Second Comforter doctrine (Joseph misinterpreted John 14), or appeals to his claim that when one is baptized by fire, he or she has their Gentile blood purged and becomes a literal blood Israelite. Then He can appear to you because now you’re a blood Israelite. But if the Latter-Day Saints already are Israelites, as some of Joseph Smith’s revelations indicate, there would be no need to purge their non-existent Gentile blood. The last line of defense is the appeal to “personal revelation.” God has told them that Jesus appeared to Joseph and that the Second Comforter is a true doctrine.  Because personal revelation is unfalsifiable, nothing can dispute it, not even Jesus Christ.

Through all the attempted rebuttals and name-calling (a few have unfriended me or blocked me on Facebook), what I haven’t yet heard is a compelling reason why I should believe that “not at any time” and “save it be by the power of the holy ghost” mean something different than what they plainly say. And until someone can, I’m holding the line.

I think these reactions illustrate the larger problem within Mormonism, especially in the post-LDS realm. Who is the foundation of the LDS movement? The Jewish literary critic and fellow Gnostic, Harold Bloom, accurately summarized the problem when he wrote that within Mormonism, “Joseph Smith was and is a far more crucial figure than Jesus could be.” When presented with the words of Jesus in the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith First Vision, people invariably side with the First Vision.

JESUS’ MANIFESTATION TO ISRAEL

Jesus’ sermon at Bountiful is also important because He explains the unique role and ministry of the House of Israel as witnesses of Christ. Before His condescension He revealed Himself to Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Lehi, Nephi and Jacob (and others). His mortal ministry was in Jerusalem. As Jacob said, “it [was] expedient that it should be among them…for thus it behooveth our God, and there is none other nation on earth that would crucify their God.” (2 Nephi 9:5, 2 Nephi 10:3).  After His resurrection He appeared in Jerusalem, Bountiful, and then to those other tribes of Israel who had not yet seen or heard him. As witnesses of Christ, the House of Israel produced the written word used to convert the Gentiles. I believe this is what “fullness of the Gentiles” mean. In turn, as Nephi wrote,

“…in the latter days (not “end-times” days), when our seed shall have dwindled in unbelief, yea, for the space of many years, and many generations after the Messiah shall be manifested in body unto the children of men, then shall the fulness of the gospel of the Messiah come unto the Gentiles, and from the Gentiles unto the remnant of our seed—And at that day shall the remnant of our seed know that they are of the house of Israel, and that they are the covenant people of the Lord; and then shall they know and come to the knowledge of their forefathers, and also to the knowledge of the gospel of their Redeemer, which was ministered unto their fathers by him; wherefore, they shall come to the knowledge of their Redeemer and the very points of his doctrine, that they may know how to come unto him and be saved.” (1 Nephi 15:13.)

There’s a profound beauty to the symbiotic relationship between Israel and Gentiles, and how God uses each group to lift the other. Israel, as witnesses, manifested Christ in the things they wrote. The Gentiles are converted to Christ through those writings (I believe this is what the “fullness of the Gentiles” means) and then use them to act as “nursing father and nursing mothers” to bring scattered Israel, primarily the remnant of Lehi, back into the fold.  It strikes me as a plan only God could conceive.

THE PROBLEM WITH D&C 84

Unfortunately, Joseph made another blunder that undermines his 1832 and 1838 claims. In September 1832—three months after the original First Vision account was put to paper—he produced one of his landmark revelations later canonized as D&C 84. There are significant issues with this revelation, which is said to be “the word of the Lord,” but I want to highlight one part of it that challenges his later statements,

“And this greater [Melchizedek] priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God. Therefore, in the ordinances thereof (i.e. of the priesthood), the power of godliness is manifest. And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh; For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.” (D&C 84:19-22)

This is admittedly a very problematic and troublesome passage. I’m not sure I fully understand it. The First Vision allegedly happened in the spring of 1820. According to LDS sources, Peter, James and John didn’t restore the Melchizedek priesthood until the end of May 1829.  However, in his History of the Church, B.H. Roberts admits, “there is no definite account of the event in the history of the Prophet Joseph, or, for matter of that, in any of our annals” of such a restoration. Joseph’s son, Joseph Smith III likewise noted, “there is no historical evidence of such an event. Nor is there any evidence that Peter, James, and John were present…It is not safe then to write historically that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ever ordained literally…” (Reorganized History of the Church 1:64-65).

Hypothetically, if the priesthood was not restored until nine years after the First Vision, how did Joseph Smith see the face of God the Father and live to tell the tale? FAIR attempted to reconcile the problem by suggesting,

“The word ‘this’ in verse 22 does not refer to the Melchizedek Priesthood, but rather to ‘the power of godliness.’ One of the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood is the bestowal of the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (see DC 49:14). As the Lord explained in an 1831 revelation, “no man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God” (DC 67:11).”

This makes my brain hurt. According to FAIR, it’s the “power of Godliness” that allows man to see God. However, the “power of Godliness” is not possible “without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood.” How does one obtain the “power of Godliness” to see God in the Flesh without the priesthood? Also, how is one quickened by the Spirit, the Spirit they claim comes from the priesthood, without the priesthood? (Does anything in this church makes sense?) As I said, I could have this totally wrong.  Thankfully, we have the Book of Mormon that sheds additional light. Is priesthood or the holy spirit necessary to see God? No, not according to Moroni,

“For it was by faith that Christ showed himself unto our fathers, after he had risen from the dead; and he showed not himself unto them until after they had faith in him; wherefore, it must needs be that some had faith in him, for he showed himself not unto the world. But because of the faith of men he has shown himself unto the world…and there were many whose faith was so exceedingly strong, even before Christ came, who could not be kept from within the veil, but truly saw with their eyes the things which they had (previously) beheld with an eye of faith.” (Moroni, Ether 12:7-8, 19. You will not find one act, deed or miracle performed and accomplished by the “power of the priesthood” in the Book of Mormon. It’s always faith.)

In September of 1832 “God the Father” had not yet entered the narrative, so Joseph could’ve theoretically written D&C 84 without contradicting the 1832 account. He could have seen Jesus, but not the Father, which requires priesthood. That is if Jesus Christ and God the Father were two distinct beings. Unfortunately for Joseph, they aren’t two distinct beings, thus nullifying the 1838 account as well. When Christ appeared to the brother of Jared He said, “Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son.” (Ether 3:14.) Moroni writes that the brother of Jared saw “the finger of Lord,” (Ether 3:8) and that God ministered to him such a way that the Brother of Jared “would know He was God.” (Ether 3:18.)  It was through the brother of Jared’s faith, not priesthood, that he had a “perfect knowledge of God…therefore he saw Jesus.” (Ether 3:20).

On the eve of His condescension, the voice of the Lord came to Nephi, son of Helaman,

“Behold, I come unto my own, to fulfil all things which I have made known unto the children of men from the foundation of the world, and to do the will, both of the Father and of the Son—of the Father because of me, and of the Son because of my flesh.” (3 Nephi 1:13-14)

There’s only One God.  That God is Jesus Christ. He is the Father in the Spirit and the Son in the flesh. Joseph Smith, as a Gentile, couldn’t have seen Jesus. Because Jesus Christ is God, he couldn’t have seen God the Father and Jesus Christ.

The First Vision never happened.

WHY DID JOSEPH CREATE FIRST VISION NARRATIVE?

The natural question is why would Joseph claim a series of events that never happened? Why he would try to bring the Saints, a group of Gentiles, into the presence of God at the Kirtland Temple in 1836? Why would he introduce a doctrine in which Jesus Christ and God the Father come to you personally? Why would Oliver Cowdery tell the departing Quorum of the Twelve (again, all Gentiles) that their ordinations to the apostleship were “not full and complete till God has laid His hand upon you”?  Until I can sit down across from him and ask myself, I’m left to speculate. So, I will speculate.

I think Joseph Smith believed he was prophet, seer, revelator like the Hebrew prophets. He was a lawgiver like Moses. He would succeed in bringing the Saints into the presence of God where Moses had failed. He would establish Zion, the holy city and New Jerusalem. He would establish the kingdom of God. To claim that kind of authority requires the same authority he likely believed the Hebrew prophets had. Namely, the personal appearance of God. So, he gave it to himself. But these things weren’t his job. According to an early revelation given to Martin Harris, which I happen to think is probably authentic and was delivered to Harris by Moroni via Joseph,

“I the Lord am God, and I have given these things unto my servant Joseph, and I have commanded him that he should stand as a witness of these things, nevertheless I have caused him that he should enter into a covenant with me, that he should not show them except I command him, and he has no power over them except I grant it unto him; and he has a gift to translate the book, and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift.” (Book of Commandments 4:2, revelation dated March 1829)

His only calling was to translate the Book of Mormon and stand as a witness of it. Somewhere along the line, he decided this wasn’t enough. Was it pride? Ego? The desire for money and power over others? Probably. So, in 1834-35, he, or someone working for him (likely W.W. Phelps and Sidney Rigdon) changed the revelation to read,

“And you have a gift to translate the plates; and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you, and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished.” (D&C 5:2-5. Also notice the shift from third person to first person, which doesn’t make sense if this was a revelation given to Martin Harris. I don’t know if the change from “book” to “plates” is significant.)

I think the biggest tragedy of the First Vision account is that we, as members of the various Restoration traditions, don’t understand who Jesus Christ really is. He has been demoted from the Infinite and Eternal God to a spiritual being who qualified for godhood through obedience. Several key passages in 1 Nephi that state Jesus Christ is the Eternal God were even changed in 1837, likely in an attempt to accommodate the emerging First Vision story.  Had Joseph truly seen Jesus, he, too, would know what the brother of Jared knew.  But he doesn’t because He didn’t.

NONE OF THE BRETHREN HAVE SEEN JESUS

One of the criticisms routinely levied against Joseph Smith’s successors is that they haven’t claimed to see Jesus. For the post-LDS crowd who remain committed to Joseph Smith, this is all the evidence they need that every church prophet-president from Brigham Young to Russell M. Nelson is an imposter. They lack Joseph’s gifts and experiences and by extension, the right to be called a prophet. Leadership hasn’t really helped their own cause, unfortunately. Boyd K. Packer once said,

“Occasionally during the past year, I have been asked a question. Usually it comes as a curious, almost an idle, question about the qualifications to stand as a special witness for Christ. The question they ask is, ‘Have you seen Him?’ That is a question that I have never asked of another. I have not asked that question of my brethren in the Quorum, thinking that it would be so sacred and so personal that one would have to have some special inspiration, indeed, some authorization, even to ask it. There are some things just too sacred to discuss.”

The Brother of Jared, Neph, Lehi, Jacob, King Lamoni, and Mormon could not be reached for comment. To a cynic or critic, Packer’s words could be construed as a defense against claims the brethren haven’t seen Jesus. Perhaps they have, but they just can’t speak about it. However, back in 2016, Dallin H. Oaks caused a stir at a fireside in Idaho where he essentially admitted what some have long suspected. When he was asked if we should pray for an Alma the Younger-type conversion experience, he replied,

“How can we get the kind of testimony that he received? I don’t think we’ll get it like Paul did, who wrote where an angel appeared to him, or where Alma the Younger had a startling experience. The Lord gives a few of those kinds of experiences and they’re recorded in the scriptures to catch our attention. The answer – but I’ve never had an experience like that. I don’t know anyone among the first presidency or the quorum of the twelve who’ve had that kind of experience.”

Now you know why they haven’t. At least thirteen of the fifteen men in the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve are verifiable Gentiles: Nelson, Oaks, Eyring, Ballard, Holland, Uchtdorf, Cook, Christofferson, Bednar, Andersen, Rasband, Stevenson, and Renlund are British, German and Scandinavian surnames. (I reserve judgment on Elders Gong and Soares, though I’m fairly confident they aren’t Israelites.) They will never see Jesus during mortality. Even the original revelation, if one chooses to believe in it, reads that “the twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world.” (D&C 107:23). We shouldn’t expect of them something Jesus said wouldn’t happen and isn’t required of them according to Joseph’s revelation. I appreciate Elder Oaks honestly. He told the truth, which is more than we can say for Joseph Smith.

CONCLUSION

Over the last twenty or so years, a fair number of people have claimed to see Jesus. I suspect in the future we’ll see a lot more. It’s easy to be seduced by these people. Because ours is a religion of visions and angels and encounters with the Divine, I believe that we, as Latter-Day Saints, aren’t very good at sniffing out wolves among us. From what I’ve witnessed, we tend to accept supernatural claims without any skepticism. I think we’d be well-served to question a little bit more. And Joseph Smith, as founder of the faith, should be scrutinized and questioned more than anyone else.

The Book of Mormon is an excellent standard by which we can judge claims of having seen Jesus. If any man or woman comes to you and claims to have seen Jesus, you can be sure that person isn’t telling the truth. If any man or woman claims to have seen God the Father and Jesus, you can be doubly sure they aren’t telling the truth.  If any man or woman tells you Jesus Christ is anything other the Infinite and Eternal God, you can be sure they aren’t telling you the truth. My advice is to avoid these people.  Some claimants have already been exposed as deceivers and I think it’s only a matter of time before the others are, too.

There’s nothing any of these self-professed prophets can offer you that you don’t already have access to. There’s nothing Joseph Smith “revealed” that’s essential to your salvation. Don’t worry about FOMO, or not being a part of some covenant or a latter-day Zion. All Jesus has asked of us is to repent, have faith, be baptized with water and fire, and endure to the end.  That’s it. The rest will take care of itself.