Why am I paranoid? Because everyone is out to get me. Thats why! If you were in my position, you would be paranoid too.

Imagine that you’ve joined a super secret society. In order to join this secret society you had to prove your allegiance. You did this in many ways, one of which was to promise that you would never tell anyone else about the things you do in secret with the other members of the society. You also give of your own money to help the society’s cause. You also attend several hours of meetings a week as well as doing volunteer work and accepting assignments as the leaders of the society feel so inclined. You are also expected to attend a special worship session as often as you can in order to participate in the secret society’s sacred ceremonies and rituals. This society stands for something. You used to beleive and agree with everything that the society stands for.

Then, by sheer coincidence, you come across some information regarding the society that does not agree with what you have been told. You find out how the society came to be. How it was created. How the rituals and ceremonies were created, and you find out that many of the founders of the society had some pretty crazy beliefs and idea’s and were involved with some very bizarre practices that are both illegal and contradict what the society currently teaches and practices.

You feel like you must be wrong. You feel that the things you are learning must be wrong. Someone, maybe an enemy of the society, made all of this stuff up to discredit your society. Yet you continue to read and learn and you are able to find documents from the societies own archives that prove that the accusations are correct. All of the grand stories about how the society was formed and created are are lies. And to make it worse, the society continues to live the lie as if it doesn’t matter, yet one of the main characteristics that the society deems most important is truth and honesty. Something that you now understand they do not practice themselves. You have to make a decision. You can either stay or leave the society and look elsewhere for a community that shares your same beleives and standards.

Imagine that everyone you know, all of your family, all of your friends, all of your neighbors, all of your co-workers and colleagues from your professional life, are all members of this secret society. You used to have so much in common, yet now it seems that your beliefs and standards are at opposite polarities. As a member of the society, you followed the creed that this society is the only society that will get you anywhere in life. There were benefits that made it all worth while. You now understand that those benefits are bogus and a lie, yet those within the society are taught to defend those beliefs diligently.

You try to discuss your concerns with someone you care about and they attack you veamently, accusing you of all manner of gross immorality. They claim you have been taken in by the enemy of the society and that you must become ever diligent and obedient if you are to escape the enemy’s grasp. The rumors of your plight spread like wildfire and soon it seems that everyone knows about your demise. The leaders of your society call you in and explain the seriousness of your disobedience and make threats. You try to explain why you have doubts about the society and they scoff at you. They tell you that it is not true, or that it doesn’t matter, and that you need to be obedient and forget all of those things you have read about.

You are at a cross-roads. You can’t reconcile the things you have learned with the society that seems to be so good, but is very flawed from the foundation up. You can’t just let it go. You would be living a lie and you can’t do that. You have to get out. But you have heard stories of those who have left the society. Stories about spouses getting divorced and families breaking up. You love your family more than anything. Your spouse is the love of your life and your children are everything to you. You don’t want your family to be effected by you leaving the society.

Imagine that everyone you know treats you the same way that the leaders of the society treated you. They think less of you as a person. They treat you as an outcast. They act as if you are the enemy and that you are a sinner and have gone crazy. You can’t attend parties or family functions without everyone talking about you behind your back. When they talk to you it seems as though they are just being polite. Sometimes they tell you how wrong you are and how great the society is. If you mention any of the things you learned about the society that bothers you they dismiss it and provide some convoluted and illogical and completely inaccurate reason for the inconsistancy. They don’t take you seriously and only care about bringing you back to the society, not about your personal happiness. They eventually write you off as a lost cause and avoid you from then on.

Imagine if this weren’t my imagination. I’m paranoid because the circumstances outlined above happens every day. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Mormons, inflict this punishment on their loved ones and acquaintances on a daily basis. Families are torn apart. Friendships lost. All in the name of religion. The religion is more important than the relationship of a loved one. Members are told that loyalty to the society is more important than the ones you love.

Now, imagine if this was happening to you. I know that many who read this blog are in the same boat. We are in a difficult place and we know what will happen if we voice our concerns. At this point, my wife is the only human I have discussed this with outside of the anonymity of the Internet. I’m lucky in that she shares some of the same concerns. It has only brought us closer together. I know that my wife and children are OK but I don’t want them to be hurt because I have decided that I don’t want to continue my membership in the church. I’m paranoid because I know what will happen if I go any further and I’m frightened enough to stay in limbo until I can figure out how to avoid the inevitable, if that is possible.

read a post by Hüffenhardt titled How to Produce a Spiritual Expieriences and it got me thinking. As I pondered, I reviewed several of my own posts on the subject, Feeling the Spirit and Confirmation of the Spirit, and decided to come up with a little logic game to see if my thoughts make sense.

First, a little intro…

I know from my own experience, for example, that the Holy Ghost knows some of the mathematical equations used to solve problems in thermodynamics, a branch of the sciences. I was a struggling physics student studying in a book that I still own. I keep it for historical and spiritual reasons. Halfway down a page (I could even show you where it is on the page), in the middle of some mathematics, I had a clear confirmation that what I was reading was true. It was exactly the feeling I had had come to me before as I pondered the Lord’s scriptures and that I have had many times since. So I knew that the Holy Ghost understood whatever was true in what I might be asked on an examination in thermodynamics.
Henry B. Eyring - Sept 10, 2006
http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=11468

I’ve created the flow charts below to explain how the Church teaches what “feeling the spirit” means.

If Mormons had their way, every question to a religious subject would be answered this way because nobody would get it wrong!

The concept of understanding truth is easy when viewed using the flowchart below.

Its simple, really. If you feel the spirit, then whatever you are contemplating/pondering/viewing/hearing/reading is true. Thats the nutshell, right?

Lets say that I’m watching Disney’s High School Musical 2 (or as my 6 year old daughter calls it: Highsical Musical 2) and I “feel the spirit” during one of the gushy romantic songs… what does it mean? It could mean that the lyrics of the song are true, or that singing is good and wholesome, or that love is good, or that I should buy Disney stock or maybe that Vanessa Hudgens can’t sing, which is true. Well, if I were to ask my TBM Mormon buddies, they would say that it doesn’t mean anything. Well, if I “feel” something that has been identified by the Church as “feeling the spirit”, then when I “feel” that “spirit” it should mean something, right? Wrong. It only means something when you are dealing with things of the spirit. Well, that is not right either. Just ask Henry B. Eyring (see intro reference above).

This is one of the major problems I have with religion at the moment. I have been taught from my youth that the “spirit” will testify of the truth of all things. Well, all things means all things, right? It doesn’t limit itself to just the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith, it testifies of all things, which means that when I feel the spirit when listening to a 3 Doors Down CD that they are true.

Since I began questioning the Church I have realized that “feeling the spirit” means nothing. I’ve realized that the feelings I get are a natural part of my physici, not divine communication. Now that I understand that, I’ve realized that in order for me to find truth, it has to make sense. The Church no longer makes sense to me. It used to, when I used circular logic and “he said it was true and he is a good person so I beleive him” logic or “my parents beleive it and they wouldn’t lie to me” testimonies to base my beliefs on.

p.s.: For good measure, I’ve created this last flow chart that seems to represent how all TBM Mormons deal with others who might be praying for an answer to life’s important questions…

The official First Vision account claims there were numerous religious revivals in the area at the time the First Vision occurred.

According to church conference reports, newspapers, church periodicals, presbytery records and published interviews from the 1820’s, there was no revival between 1820 and 1821. Local churches recorded very few additions to their congregations in the early 1820’s.

For example, in 1820, the Baptist Church in Palmyra only received 8 people through profession of faith and baptism, the Presbyterian church added 14 members, while the Methodist circuit lost 6 members, dropping from 677 in 1819 to 671 in 1820 and down to 622 in 1821 (see Geneva area Presbyterian Church Records, Presbyterian Historical Society, Philadelphia, PA; Records for the First Baptist Church in Palmyra, American Baptist Historical Society, Rochester, NY; Minutes of the [Methodist] annual Conference, Ontario Circuit, 1818-1821, pp. 312, 330, 346, 366).
http://www.irr.org/mit/fvision.html

In the Rise of Mormonism: 1816-1844 by Michael Marquardt, the author reviews several of the local church records and come to the same conclusion as that of the reference above.

There are a few apologetics who seem to think that the lack of information regarding the 1820 revival is due to the fact that it was so common that it was not deemed newsworthy. Of course, this is grasping at straws. Membership is a big deal to a Church and they tend to keep fairly good records, although sometimes those records are lost as is the case with many of the records of the local Palmyra denominations.

I agree that this point may be insignificant in and of itself and most believing Mormons would not have a problem with it. My current questioning of the Church is not due to one huge lie that can be proved 100%. It has to do with the hundreds and thousands of inconsistencies that all add up. When coupling this information with recorded accounts from Church history and local history where these accounts took place, the overall picture results in a web of contradiction that can, in my mind, only conclude that the First Vision is a magnificent story strewn together by Joseph Smith.

References:

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Religious_revivals_in_1820
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Conflation_of_1824-25_revival%3F
http://www.irr.org/mit/fvision.html
http://www.mrm.org/topics/joseph-smith/joseph-smiths-first-vision-fact-or-fiction
The Rise of Mormonism: 1816-1844 By H. Michael Marquardt

As I’ve researched the LDS church in recent years, with a new understanding and different view-point on what I’m reading, I’ve come to realize that there are a lot of teachings taught within the LDS church that are taught as if they are scripture yet have no basis in anything remotely authoritative. These teachings are unknowingly taught as if it came directly from the prophet or from the Book of Mormon, yet are usually rooted in hearsay and half-truths.

Many apologetics responses to problems with Church history and doctrine have been to downplay the authority of some teachings to the point that the doctrine is just not valid because a revelation on the subject has never been accepted by the body of saints in General Conference. If this is the case, why can’t the church just come out and say that many things taught in the church are not necessarily correct and that many church leaders have erred and should not have said certain things and that they should not be considered to be authoritative? Wouldn’t this clear up a lot of confusion?

This just doesn’t happen. But it should. The Church would have much more respect in the world if it just owned up to its problems and fixed them. We are all left to decide for ourselves if certain teachings are correct or not using the “pray and find out for yourself if it is true” method. The church leaders who spoke wrongly are never publicly corrected and many Church members use these examples in class lessons which perpetuates the problem.

What does a TBM Mormon say if asked if they beleive in polygamy? They’ll give you the standard “we don’t practice polygamy any more” or “those who practice polygamy are excommunicated” answer and leave it at that. The fact is that in order to be a TBM Mormon, you must beleive in it. You must beleive that polygamy is divine and true doctrine.

As a missionary, I was asked that very question many times. I now understand how wrong my answers were then. I now understand that the “standard” answer is equal to lying. If I were truthful, I would have explained how Joseph Smith introduced polygamy in 1831, by divine revelation from God, and I “knew” that he was a prophet and that polygamy was a true doctrine. Then the saints were driven westward and ended up having to abandon the practice due to pressure from the United States in order for Utah to become a state. In fact, it took two different revelations, called Manifesto’s, in 1890 and 1904, in order to get the point across that the church no longer condoned polygamy.

These revelations were not intended on ending the “belief” or “doctrine” of polygamy, they intended to convince outsiders that the Church no longer “practiced” it. The practice of polygamy continued into the 1900’s as leaders in the church continued to take plural wifes and attempted to keep it hidden from outsiders.

This also brings us to another fascinating aspect of church history… the publishing of history that counters the faith-promoting version the church purports as truth. Michael Quinn, one of the September Six, was excommunicated from the church due to his publishing of research into post-manifesto polygamy. The content of the research has been invariably deemed as accurate. The problem the church has with such information is that it proves that they knowingly cast half-truths as whole-truths and try to twist the events of early church history so that its easier to beleive.

The version of the First Vision that the Church adheres to today includes distinct information related to the make-up of the Godhood. This story, as outlined in the Pearl of Great Price, includes reference to God, the Father, and the Son, Jesus Christ. This doctrine is unique to the LDS Church and is subsequently a source of contention between the LDS Church and other denominations. It is one of the reasons that the Church claims to have more of the truth than other Church’s. However, versions of the First Vision written prior to the official version contain contradictory accounts.

The first account, purportedly written by Joseph Smith himself, written in 1832 (11 years after the actual event), mentions seeing only one personage, that being Jesus Christ.

The second account, also attributed to Joseph Smith as written in his personal journal, was written in November of 1835 (15 years after the actual event), states that one personage, unnamed, who was specifically neither the Father nor the Son, visited him along with many angels.

The official version contained in the Pearl of Great Price was written around 1838, although not published until 1842, 18 years after the actual event and 10 years after Joseph began his public missionary efforts.

Incidentally, the original 1830 version of the Book of Mormon contained verses that referenced a singular God, whereas new editions have been altered to reflect the existence of two. For example, in First Nephi 11:18, the original verse read “Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh.” Today’s Book of Mormon reads “Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.” (emphasis added) Also, the original First Nephi 11:21 read “behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!”, yet today’s reads “”behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!”

Approximately 3,913 changes have been recorded between the original 1830 printing of the Book of Mormon compared to the version we read today. Arguably, most edits are of insignificant consequence. However, I cannot ignore such a significant change in a fundamental doctrine such as this. The very nature of Gods existence is of such importance that it seems outright foolish to believe that Joseph Smith understood this doctrine in 1820, yet personally recorded accounts to the contrary for eighteen years until the final revision of the First Vision that we use today in promoting the Church to the whole world.

For sake of thoroughness, I will provide references at the bottom of this post from Church documents that further confuse the issue of whether Joseph Smith saw the Father and the Son in the First Vision. In the end, the current teaching was not standard doctrine until after the turn of the century.

The proof I used on my mission,  in the first missionary discussion, for there being three distinct members of the Godhood was that Joseph Smith saw God, the Father, and Jesus Christ in the First Vision.

“In 1820 young Joseph Smith prayed to know which church he should join. In answer to his prayer, God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him. Through him they restored the truth about the plan of God. Joseph Smith was a prophet and a powerful witness of Christ.”
The Plan of our Heavenly Father, First Missionary Discussion

This doctrine is quite different in meaning from other religions and one that I found later was a gradual doctrine that didn’t take shape until well after the First Vision occurred.

My conclusion is that the currently published version of the First Vision is a carefully crafted story, enduring numerous drafts and revisions, until it came to a palatable version that can be believed if combined with multiple testaments and seemingly personal spiritual experiences that agree in unison. Its certainly a nice story. One that can influence people who have a hope of something more than they currently believe. That hope leads to a belief that the story is factual and true.

I can no longer believe that the First Vision account actually happened, at least not in the version that the Church specifically teaches as the only way that it happened. If it were so, the Church would not have had to revise the original versions to the extent that they have. Furthermore, Joseph Smith would have been telling the same story from the beginning. It’s one thing to believe that he would tell the story differently depending on the audience and it’s another to completely change the doctrinal basis for the Church in the same breath. It simply does not add up, and I have decided not to believe it any longer.

Furthermore, I can no longer believe that God and Jesus Christ exist in any manner that resembles that which is taught by the Church, or by any other church or denomination, for that matter. As the basis for my belief in God and Jesus Christ has crumbled, so to has my belief in any higher power.

************

References:

1852 - Brigham Young preached his first Adam-God sermon. Young held to this doctrine the rest of his life, dying in 1877. Some of the brethren continued to believe the Adam-God doctrine for years afterward.

1853 - Lucy Smith’s family history was printed. She did not personally recount anything concerning an 1820 vision. Instead, she simply inserted Joseph’s account from the Times and Seasons.

1854 - Speaking at conference April 6, 1854, Apostle Orson Hyde stated:

“Some one may say, ‘If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?’ Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else. (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 335)

1855 - LDS President Brigham Young taught on Feb. 18, 1855: “…so it was in the advent of this new dispensation….The messenger did not come to an eminent divine…The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven,…But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day,…” ( Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 171)

A few days later Apostle Wilford Woodruff preached: “That same organization and Gospel that Christ died for, and the Apostles spilled their blood to vindicate, is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God,… The angel taught Joseph Smith those principles which are necessary for the salvation of the world;… He told him the Gospel was not among men, and that there was not a true organization of His kingdom in the world,… This man to whom the angel appeared obeyed the Gospel;…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, pp. 196-197)

1857 - LDS Apostle Heber C. Kimball, speaking Nov. 8th, 1857, seemed to be oblivious to any vision where Smith saw God and Christ: “Do you suppose that God in person called upon Joseph Smith, our Prophet? God called upon him; but God did not come himself and call, but he sent Peter to do it. Do you not see? He sent Peter and sent Moroni to Joseph, and told him that he had got the plates.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 29)

1863 - Apostle John Taylor explained in a sermon March 1, 1863: “How did this state of things called Mormonism originate? We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p. 127)

LDS Apostle George A. Smith, Nov. 15th, 1863, preached: “When Joseph Smith was about fourteen or fifteen years old,…he went humbly before the Lord and inquired of Him, and the Lord answered his prayer, and revealed to Joseph, by the ministration of angels, the true condition of the religious world. When the holy angel appeared, Joseph inquired which of all these denominations was right and which he should join, and was told they were all wrong,…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 12, pp. 333-334)

1864 - One year later, November 15, 1864, Apostle Smith seemed to be describing the vision in a more traditional way:

“When the Lord appeared to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him a knowledge pertaining to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and the work of the last days, Satan came also with his power…He [Joseph] thus describes the incident: “In the spring of 1820, …I saw a pillar of light…I saw two personages…’This is my beloved son, hear him.’ …just at the time that God was revealing unto his servant Joseph to raise up men to bear testimony of the principles of the Gospel…Satan was at work stirring up the hearts of the children of men…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, pp. 1-2)

1869 - Five years later Apostle Smith again referred to Smith’s first vision: “He sought the Lord by day and by night, and was enlightened by the vision of an holy angel. When this personage appeared to him, of his first inquiries was, ‘Which of the denominations of Christians in the vicinity was right?’ ” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 77-78 June 20, 1869 )

Speaking on Dec. 19, 1869, Orson Pratt taught: “By and by an obscure individual, a young man, rose up, and, in the midst of all Christendom, proclaimed the startling news that God had sent an angel to him;… This young man, some four years afterwards, was visited again by a holy angel.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, pp. 65-66)

1871 - On March 19 Orson Pratt preached: “He went out to pray, being then a little over fourteen years of age, …He saw in this light two glorious personages, one of whom spoke to him, pointing to the other, saying, ‘This is my beloved Son, hear ye him.’ …When these persons interrogated him to know what he desired, he answered and said, ‘Lord show me which is the true church.’ He was then informed by one of these personages that there was no true church upon the face of the whole earth;… The vision withdrew; the personages attending and the light withdrew. … he knew that God had manifested himself to him;…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 14, pp. 140-141)

Although Orson Pratt’s sermon on March 19, 1871 could be interpreted as either angels or God, his sermon on Dec. 10 of that year clearly identified the messengers as angels: “Here was Joseph Smith, a boy, …he was only between fourteen and fifteen years of age….Would he stand forth and bear testimony that he had seen with his own eyes a messenger of light and glory, and that he heard the words of his mouth as they dropped from his lips and had received a message from the Most High, at that early age? And then…to have the finger of scorn pointed at him, …’No visions in our day, no angels come in our day,…’ and still continue to testify, …that God had sent his angel from heaven.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 14, p. 262)

1874 - Speaking June 23rd, 1874, President Brigham Young still seemed to be identifying the personages as messengers rather than God and Christ: “Do we believe that the Lord sent his messengers to Joseph Smith, and commanded him to refrain from joining any Christian church, and to refrain from the wickedness he saw in the churches, and finally delivered to him a message informing him that the Lord was about to establish his kingdom on the earth, and led him on step by step until he gave him the revelation concerning the plates? Yes, this is all correct.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 18, p. 239)

Later that year, on Sept. 20, 1874, Orson Pratt preached: “Joseph Smith, …was a boy about fourteen years of age at the time the Lord first revealed himself in a very marvelous manner to him. …he saw nothing excepting the light and two glorious personages standing before him in the midst of this light. One of these personages, pointing to the other, said—’Behold my beloved Son, hear ye him.. After this, power was given to Mr. Smith to speak, and in answer to an inquiry by the Lord as to what he desired, he said that he desired to know which was the true Church,…immediately after receiving it, he began to relate it to some of his nearest friends, and he was told by some of the ministers who came to him to enquire about it, that there was no such thing as the visitation of heavenly messengers, that God gave no new revelation…he knew that he had seen this light, that he had beheld these two personages, and that he had heard the voice of one of them;…and he continued to testify that God had made himself manifest to him;…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 17, pp. 278-280)

1876 - LDS Apostle John Taylor, speaking December 31, 1876, identified the personages as follows: “…the Father and the Son appeared to him, arrayed in glory,…’This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased…’ ” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 18, pp. 325-326)

1879 - LDS Apostle John Taylor, speaking on March 2, 1879, identifies the personages as angels: “…Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right…the angel merely told him to join none of them…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, p. 167)

However, later the same day, he declared that the Father and Son appeared to Joseph: “When the Father and the Son and Moroni and others came to Joseph Smith, he had a priesthood conferred upon him…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, p. 257)

On December 7, 1879 Taylor declared: “the Lord revealed himself to him together with his Son Jesus, and, pointing to the latter, said; ‘This is my beloved Son, hear him.’” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 21, p. 161).

1880 - John Taylor preached on January 4, 1880: “…the Lord appeared unto Joseph Smith, both the Father and the Son, the Father pointing to the Son said, ‘this is my beloved Son…’” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 21, p. 65)

Orson Pratt gave his most specific identification of the personages in his sermon Sept. 18, 1880: “…in the spring of 1820, before Joseph Smith was of the age of fifteen….in answer to his prayers, there was the manifestation of two of the great personages in the heavens—not angels, not messengers, but two persons that hold the keys of authority over all the creations of the universe. Who were they? God the Eternal Father and his Son Jesus Christ,…he heard the glorious words that proceeded from the Father, as he pointed to his Son and said, to Joseph, ‘This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.’ This was a new revelation;…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 21, p. 308)

1882 - Apostle George Q. Cannon, on Oct. 29, 1882, seemed to start Joseph’s call with the vision of Moroni. He did mention that Joseph saw Jesus and God but did not put those experiences in the framework of the first vision: “He [Joseph] was visited constantly by angels; and the Son of God Himself condescended to come and minister unto him, the Father having also shown Himself unto him; and these various angels, the heads of dispensations, having also ministered unto him. Moroni, in the beginning, as you know, to prepare him for his mission, came and ministered and talked to him from time to time,…” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 23, p. 362)

1883 - William Smith, Joseph’s brother, remembered the vision as happening in 1823. He wrote that Joseph went into the woods to pray about which church to join: “An angel then appeared to him…He told him that none of the sects were right;…” (William Smith on Mormonism, by William Smith, 1883, Herald Steam Book, Iowa, pp. 5-10, as printed on New Mormon Studies CD-ROM.)

1884 - Apostle George Teasdale understood the first vision to be “a vision of the Father and the Son.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 25, p.13 & 18)

Speaking on January 28, 1884, B.H. Roberts related: “In the Spring of 1820, Joseph Smith,…was praying in the woods to the Father,,… He saw a pillar of light descending from heaven…In the midst of this glorious light stood two personages:… ‘This is my beloved son; hear ye him.’—…for the Father had revealed the Son to him.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 25, p. 138)

1888 - LDS assistant Church Historian Andrew Jenson still had the understanding that the first vision was one of angels. He published an account of the first vision in the paper The Historical Record, Jan. 1888, pp. 353-357. This account is taken from the Times and Seasons account with Jenson’s comments summarizing the experience, “The angel again forbade Joseph to join any of these churches, …” Jenson then reverted to Smith’s narrative, “Many other things did he (the angel) say unto me which I cannot write at this time.” Note that Jenson adds the clarifying words “the angel.”

When Jenson’s paper was reprinted a couple of years later this account had been changed in two places. At the spots where he identified the being as an “angel” it was changed to “the Holy Being” and “the Christ.”

This block of references were copied from http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/firstvision.htm with bold emphasis added by myself.

************

Other References:
http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/firstvision.htm
http://www.irr.org/mit/fvision.html
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_first_vision.shtml
http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=156
http://josephsmithstudies.com/jswebsite_012.htm
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/First_Vision_accounts
http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/jshandwriting.htm
http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/firstvision.htm
http://trialsofascension.net/mormon/vision.html
http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/mclaims2.htm
http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/dirs/d_1st_v.phtml

First, to provide some context, I provide the following quote:

“Our entire case as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rests on the validity of this glorious First Vision. … 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 Mag., Nov. 1998, Gordon B. Hinckley, pp. 70-71)

Several years ago I decided that I needed to be more actively engaged in studying the scriptures. I have never been a fan of reading scripture. I’ll admit that I have never been too interested in them. Its never interested me to the point that I could read the scriptures daily. I was taught that I should and I felt guilty that I didn’t have a desire to. I would often pray to gain that desire, although that didn’t work. I also felt guilty that I felt extreme boredom every time I read the scriptures. So, in order to feel as though I was following the counsel of the Brethren, I decided to read about church history instead. As I can read church history without being bored to a deep slumber I thought this would be a good replacement. So I started at the beginning - the First Vision.

I searched the Internet for anything to do with the First Vision and came across a FARMS article about the subject that fascinated me. They had an article examining three written accounts of the First Vision. Wait just a second here… there are three written accounts of the first vision? That just couldn’t be the case. I had grown up in the church, been learning church history for over a quarter of a century, served a mission and married in the temple and I had never heard of the multiple versions. I got excited at the prospect that I could learn more about the First Vision than I had originally been taught. I figured that the official First Vision account that we read about in church and all of our church manuals and in the church video’s was so inspirational that there must be more insight into it if there were other written accounts. I read the two other accounts in earnest to learn new nuggets of wisdom and inspiration. I was hoping that I would gain further insight into the Church’s beginnings and gain a greater understanding of the gospel that would help my testimony grow. But what came was completely different and unsuspecting. All I gained from the other First Vision accounts was confusion. Why did they differ so much? Why were they contradictory at times? Why did they not match more closely? Why did one account mention God and Jesus Christ when another didn’t mention them at all? Instead of answers, I had questions.

Instinctively I began earnest research. I steered away from anti-Mormon websites that claimed all sorts of outrageous claims that I knew were false and kept with Church approved sources. Everything I read about the other First Vision accounts attempted to explain the differences in ways that didn’t add up. I happened across a few anti-Mormon websites that used Church books as resources for their arguments and I cross-referenced them for accurateness. It was interesting to me that the quotes from Church sources seemed to uphold their outrageous claims accurately. In many cases, all they had to do was quote the references and leave it at that.

I had a belief. That belief was that everything in the First Vision was pure, true and fact. Now I was learning new information that contradicted my core beliefs in the Church. I was experiencing cognitive dissonance:

In the simplest explanation, cognitive dissonance is having 2 different and contradicting beliefs in your brain at the same time. Cognitive- a mental awareness, Dissonance- a clash or disharmony. Cognitive Dissonance makes people feel uncomfortable, but this feeling of discomfort is the reason why people make changes in their lives.
http://mormonskeptic.blogspot.com

I couldn’t continue believing the official version of the First Vision and believe the other versions and everything that I had been taught as well. They contradicted to the point that I couldn’t reconcile the differences satisfactorily. I further researched this and other topics by reading the viewpoints and explanations of Church apologetics and have found their reasoning to be quite muddy and it seemed as though they were grasping at straws to explain something that could not be explained by simple fact and truth. I had to either go on blind faith and believe what I had been taught from the beginning, or change my beliefs.

I ultimately chose the later. It was not an immediate decision. I continued to read and study and contemplated the big picture before coming to that conclusion. It is not something that I have done on a whim. It was a difficult and extremely stressful decision that I still question, but I feel that it is the right decision.

Shortly after my interest peaked in regards to the History of the Church I came across a few websites that explained the idea of “faith promoting history”. This is the idea that the Church provides only one version of history so that it might uplift and promote faith. This was the first I had heard of this term and I was floored. I thought that the Church was very straight forward when it came to its history. I mean, who had “Truth” cornered if not for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I quickly realized that the history that we read in church manuals and share with investigators was only a part of the story.

Faith promoting history, in its essence, means that the Church does not trust their members to understand the whole of the story. Church leaders design church manuals and proselyting materials in such a way to shed the best possible light on the church. In its simplest form, its PR spin or story doctoring. It’s leaving the unsavory parts out so that the story is easier to swallow. In this way, the Church unsuspectingly sets up their members with the task of dealing with experiences down the road that will try their faith.

The Church doesn’t worry about this, however, as they have devised an intricate indoctrination process to combat the inevitable. Members are taught, in some not-so-subtle ways, that the Church is the source of all truth and that they should not trust any other source. We are taught that we should not read “anti-Mormon” material. We are taught that we should read the scriptures every day, focusing on the Book of Mormon and current Church leaders. We are taught that the Devil will temp us with all manner of thoughts that might contradict our “knowledge” of the truthfulness of the Gospel. We are taught that feeling the Holy Ghost when contemplating or searching for answers on Church approved topics is a confirmation of the truthfulness of said doctrine, but feeling the Holy Ghost for questions contrary to the teachings of the Church is a confirmation that Satan is trying to trick you. We are taught that it is not our lot to know all things at this time and the holes will be filled in when we are spiritually ready, which usually means after we die. In time, all members have ingrained in their subconscious an ability to deflect all faith harming materials that might come their way. Every faith challenging experience is considered a test, a test that must passed with flying colors or forever be tormented with the knowledge of not being faithful enough.

Boyd K. Packer:

“There are qualifications to teach or write the history of this church. If one is lacking in any one of these qualifications, he cannot properly teach the history of the Church… I will state these qualifications in the form of questions so that you can assess your own qualifications. Do you believe that God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ personally appeared to the boy prophet, Joseph Smith Jr., in the year 1820? Do you have personal witness that the Father and the Son appeared in all their glory and stood above that young man and instructed him according to the testimony that he gave to the world in his published history?” BYU Studies, Summer 1981, pp 272-273.

In the same address Packer states,

“There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.”

In short, you cannot write about Church history unless you are a completely faithful member and you should know how to discern between the useful and “not very useful” truth of which to write.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks provides further insight:

“Our individual, personal testimonies are based on the witness of the Spirit, not on any combination or accumulation of historical facts. If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” (”1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium,” Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26)

This must be why my faith was shaken.

Furthermore, the Church goes to the extreme by excommunicating those who publish information that may be contrary to the accepted history of the Church. Church members are taught, by these excommunications, that deviation from the standard reading material as outlined by Church leaders is paramount to one of the gravest sins one can commit, denying the Holy Ghost. This encourages members, very subtly, to steer clear of all non-Church approved reading material.

It is understandable that the Church would want to provide a “more clear” version of Church events to help its members understand the history of the Church. However, It is my opinion that keeping the rest of the history from its members is a sin of omission and constitutes lying in order to keep the members in the Church at a level where they will believe and obey everything that the Brethren say.

As I have read through much of the history that the Church does not want me to read, I can personally attest to the reasoning behind the decisions they have made. If my sole purpose was to keep members from leaving the Church, I would certainly do the same as they have done. However, if the goal is to bring every soul to Christ, then lying as a means to an end is simply not acceptable to me. The Church, ultimately, should not have to hide its history in order to convert someone to it. The history of the Church should be its own testament that it is the true church. However, due to the constant contradictions and multiple revisions of historic events, it seems that the Church has no choice but to continue the course. This is, of course, if you believe that the purpose for so doing is purely innocent. My conclusion is that the Church values its members obedience more than its members unshakable testimony in the truth; for the truth should be circumscribed into one great whole and not as parts taken to make a fictional whole that will warrant its members undying devotion regardless of the opposition.

For a church that holds truth as one of its distinguishing characteristics, it certainly doesn’t have any problem providing a modified version of history that makes it easier for everyone to swallow.

The Church teaches the following regarding the Holy Ghost…

“After we are baptized we receive the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. The Holy Ghost will be our constant companion as long as we live righteously. We can feel the influence of the Holy Ghost in different ways. Sometimes we will hear a still, small voice; have a feeling of peace; or have a warm feeling in our heart. The Holy Ghost can help us understand sacred things and will testify of the truth. As we listen to the Holy Ghost, we can tell right from wrong and feel comforted and loved.
- Family Home Evening Manual, 602, http://www.lds.org/hf/art/display/0,16842,4218-1-6-154,00.html

Also, for reference, the promise in Moroni 10:4-5

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
http://scriptures.lds.org/moro/10

My early experiences with feeling the Holy Ghost were largely related to a feeling that can most closely be explained as a “chill” starting at the base of my neck, moving down my spine and sometimes moving into my arms and legs. This is the only feeling I have ever associated with “feeling the Holy Ghost”. I have never heard a still small voice or felt a “burning in the bosom”.

The “chill” is how I felt when watching the first vision film at an Aaronic Priesthood Commemoration camp-out when I was around twelve. I felt that the story was true because I had that feeling.

I would sometimes feel the “chill” when learning about church doctrine that I had some kind of personal association with or felt like it was important in one way or another.

When I finished reading the Book of Mormon as a teenager and decided to kneel down and pray about it, I felt nothing. This was confusing to me. I was told that Heavenly Father would answer my prayer if asked sincerely. This was the first time I had asked for anything in a sincere way, so I knew that I would be answered. I had faith that God would answer my prayer and confirm to me that the Book of Mormon was a true book and it was a correct representation of what happened to Nephi and his family, etc. However, when I prayed about it, at the time that I really needed an answer, I received none. Now you might think that I would have decided to look further into this incident. Look deeper and find out why, but I didn’t need that. I ultimately came to the realization that I already knew the answer to my question. I had prayed to know the truth, but I already knew the answer. I had been taught that it was true, so why question it? I had heard stories of this exact experience from others, who prayed and had no answer, so they figured it had to be that they already knew that it was true. I associated their “non-answer” with my own and piggybacked on their conclusion that I must already know.

Fast forward to my mission where I was expected to bear my testimony on a daily basis and had to provide a personal experience as an indication of my Church’s truthfulness and I had to use the “non-answer” story as the basis for my beliefs. I had to have a better story than, “I already new it was true.” so I continued to pray and read the scriptures so that I could receive a formal answer, but I never received one.

Still, I never questioned my beliefs. I never questioned the validity of the Church or anything else the Church and my parents had taught me for that matter. I continued to believe that everything I had been taught was true.

Fast forward again to recent years where I began reading about Church history. I don’t enjoy reading the scriptures so I decided to read about church history becuase it seems to be more interesting. I read these stories from Church approved sources, mind you, so I was sure that what I was reading was going to be spiritually uplifting. However, a lot of what I read just didn’t jive with what I had been taught. For some time I figured that I just couldn’t understand it properly because only God understands all. However, the more I read, the more it didn’t add up and the more I began to question things. I started questioning my belief in everything that I had been taught from my youth up until now.

To make matters worse, I found that I was feeling the “chill” whenever I would feel sentimental about something, or when I was listening to a song that resonated with me. I began “feeling the spirit”, as I was taught to feel it by the Church, at completely random and non-religious times, and I began to think about it more deeply. I thought about how *I* feel the spirit and what I should understand from the times that I have felt the spirit in that way. I began to wonder if I had been feeling the spirit at all, if I had ever felt the spirit.

I began researching the topic on the Internet and found articles discussing spirituality and how humans generally feel spiritual and found that the ways I had been taught to feel the spirit were not owned and copyrighted by the LDS Church. Could it be that I was associating a common human emotion with spiritual meaning that might have zero correlation with religion or spirituality? Could I be misunderstanding my feelings as being a confirmation that a Church teaching is true when all I was feeling was an emotional attachment to a teaching that resonated with my subconscious? Could I ever be sure? Does feeling the spirit in that way equal “this teaching is true” or could it mean “that sure sounds nice”?

I have since come to the conclusion that the “answers” I thought I received were not answers at all (in the sense that the LDS Church owns the truthfulness of that teaching in its entirety). Obviously, how I feel about certain teachings and doctrines can be an important aspect of what I believe, but did I still believe in the church as I previously did? I was not sure. The Church teaches that we should receive a spiritual confirmation of the things that we are taught so that we can obtain a testimony. I realized that I did not have a testimony of anything that I would call concrete. I needed to start over. I needed to start from the beginning and find out for sure what I believed. At this point, I began a personal journey that has led me to this point… abandoning my core beliefs in God, in Jesus Christ, in Joseph Smith, in the Book of Mormon, the Bible, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in general.

As most churches do, the LDS church teaches that people should love one another and “do as Jesus would do”. However, when it comes right down to it, church members seem to know exactly how to judge another pretty well. Little comments such as “your countenance has changed” and “the Lord gives us these trials to test us” are provided as proof that we are off the straight and narrow. These comments are designed to “teach” us that we need to be more righteous.

In my personal life, I have been taught from my youth that everything will be fine if you pay your tithing. My father, currently a Stake President and former Bishop, has told me on several occasions that tithing, if paid faithfully, keeps everyone on the straight and narrow. Of all of the people he has counseled, those who had problems with pornography, having problems with their spouse or having problems living the word of wisdom, the one thing that these sinners didn’t do was pay their tithing.

I’m confident that most of the problems in the world come from personal decisions, not based on your obedience to giving 10% of your hard earned cash to the church. Of course paying your tithing may be indicative of a pattern to obey other commandments. I’ve reviewed my life up this point and have come to the realization that I have made a lot of good decisions. Many people who have a hard time in life can usually track their bad experiences back to a bad decision they made, or at least to a bad decision that someone else made that came to effect them adversely.

There are things taught in the church in a round-about way that ends up causing many TBMs to be very judgmental and self righteous. Here’s what I have come up with so far:

• If anything bad happens to you, it’s because of your unfaithfulness. The Lord is testing you.
• All Priesthood holders are perfect, without blemish, and every word they utter should be believed.
• Any negative thoughts regarding any church doctrine were placed there by the devil and should be counteracted by much prayer and scripture study.
• All callings come directly from the Lord, through his priesthood holders, and should never be declined.
• You must give all of your time to the church. Even if you have a family who needs you, you must attend to the church first. Especially if you are male because the women should be taking care of the house.
• Women don’t need the priesthood because they are more spiritual than men.
• Every 19 year old male is capable of serving a mission. Even if they have not had sufficient experiences to convince them that the church is true. A mission will take care of the testimony of you don’t already have one.
• All 8 year olds are capable of deciding for themselves what church is true and if they want to formally join the LDS church.
• Unmarried 22 year old females are unrighteous. For if they weren’t, the would be married and had 3 kids already.
• Unmarried 22 year old males are unrighteous. For if they weren’t, the would be married and 1 kid already with another on the way.
• Families that don’t pray together at 6 a.m. and read scriptures for half an hour in the morning and in the evening will not stay together.
• If you have any problem in life, just open your scriptures to a random page and you will instantly be provided with the answer to your problem.
• Every righteous couple should as many children as they possibly can. The more children you have, the more righteous you are. If you don’t, you are selfish.

Most people are “frightened” into being, or appearing, righteous. If it weren’t for the perceived judgment of others, most people would not be so righteous. I think this is one of the foundational purposes of religion, to use the TBM’s into keeping everyone else in check.