Criticism of Mormonism/Websites/MormonThink/The First Vision - Revision history

GregSmith: /* top */Bot replace {{FairMormon}} with {{Main Page}} and remove extra lines around {{Header}}

2024-04-13T20:20:36Z

top: Bot replace {{FairMormon}} with {{Main Page}} and remove extra lines around {{Header}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 13 April 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~FairMormon~~}}		{{Main Page}}
	{{H1		{{H1
	\|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Websites/MormonThink/The First Vision		\|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Websites/MormonThink/The First Vision

FairMormonBot: Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|authorsources=\n* +|authorsources=
\n#)

2017-10-13T03:57:06Z

Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|authorsources=\n* +|authorsources=<br>\n#)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:57, 13 October 2017
Line 128:		Line 128:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=James B. Allen, who served as assistant church historian, acknowledged that the story of the first vision "was not given general circulation in the 1830's. Dr. Allen wrote that<br><br>"...none of the available contemporary writings about Joseph Smith in the 1830's, none of the publications of the Church in that decade, and no contemporary journal or correspondence yet discovered mentions the story of the first vision...."<br><br>Dr. Allen goes on to state that in the 1830's "the general membership of the Church knew little, if anything, about it." Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, pages 29-45.		\|claim=James B. Allen, who served as assistant church historian, acknowledged that the story of the first vision "was not given general circulation in the 1830's. Dr. Allen wrote that<br><br>"...none of the available contemporary writings about Joseph Smith in the 1830's, none of the publications of the Church in that decade, and no contemporary journal or correspondence yet discovered mentions the story of the first vision...."<br><br>Dr. Allen goes on to state that in the 1830's "the general membership of the Church knew little, if anything, about it." Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, pages 29-45.
	\|authorsources=		\|authorsources=<br>
	Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, pages 29-45.		#Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, pages 29-45.
	}}		}}
	{{misinformation\|That isn't exactly what James B. Allen said. He said that the story "at best" received "limited circulation." Here is the quote from James B. Allen with the <span style="color:blue">part that the critics extracted highlighted in blue</span>:		{{misinformation\|That isn't exactly what James B. Allen said. He said that the story "at best" received "limited circulation." Here is the quote from James B. Allen with the <span style="color:blue">part that the critics extracted highlighted in blue</span>:

RogerNicholson: /* Response to claim: "How could Smith’s family be unaware of his vision while neighbors were persecuting him for it?" */

2017-09-19T14:40:40Z

Response to claim: "How could Smith’s family be unaware of his vision while neighbors were persecuting him for it?"

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:40, 19 September 2017
Line 161:		Line 161:

	MormonThink can't have it both ways: it can't be both astonishing that no one remembered Joseph talking about his First Vision in early Palmyra, ''and'' that such things were regarded as common (see above). They ''were'' seen as common (and somewhat disreputable) and so it is no surprise that no one local paid much attention to it at the time, other than to be scornful or dismissive if Joseph told them. Joseph did not tell his family about Moroni until he was ''commanded'' to do so by the angel. Rather than being inconsistent, this reinforces the truthfulness of Joseph's account: he apparently wasn't inclined to tell everyone until he was directed to do so. Perhaps he had learned his lesson and was "once bitten, twice shy"? Why do you suppose MormonThink doesn't tell us this? It's right in Joseph's official history, and yet they act like his actions are completely mysterious. Do they not know the material at all, or are they hiding something intentionally?		MormonThink can't have it both ways: it can't be both astonishing that no one remembered Joseph talking about his First Vision in early Palmyra, ''and'' that such things were regarded as common (see above). They ''were'' seen as common (and somewhat disreputable) and so it is no surprise that no one local paid much attention to it at the time, other than to be scornful or dismissive if Joseph told them. Joseph did not tell his family about Moroni until he was ''commanded'' to do so by the angel. Rather than being inconsistent, this reinforces the truthfulness of Joseph's account: he apparently wasn't inclined to tell everyone until he was directed to do so. Perhaps he had learned his lesson and was "once bitten, twice shy"? Why do you suppose MormonThink doesn't tell us this? It's right in Joseph's official history, and yet they act like his actions are completely mysterious. Do they not know the material at all, or are they hiding something intentionally?

	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
	I shortly after arose from my bed, and, as usual, went to the necessary labors of the day; but, in attempting to work as at other times, I found my strength so exhausted as to render me entirely unable. My father, who was laboring along with me, discovered something to be wrong with me, and told me to go home. I started with the intention of going to the house; but, in attempting to cross the fence out of the field where we were, my strength entirely failed me, and I fell helpless on the ground, and for a time was quite unconscious of anything. The first thing that I can recollect was a voice speaking unto me, calling me by name. I looked up, and beheld the same messenger standing over my head, surrounded by light as before. He then again related unto me all that he had related to me the previous night, and commanded me to go to my father and tell him of the vision and commandments which I had received (~~[http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/js-h/1.48-49?lang=eng#47~~ Joseph Smith History 1:48-49]).		I shortly after arose from my bed, and, as usual, went to the necessary labors of the day; but, in attempting to work as at other times, I found my strength so exhausted as to render me entirely unable. My father, who was laboring along with me, discovered something to be wrong with me, and told me to go home. I started with the intention of going to the house; but, in attempting to cross the fence out of the field where we were, my strength entirely failed me, and I fell helpless on the ground, and for a time was quite unconscious of anything. The first thing that I can recollect was a voice speaking unto me, calling me by name. I looked up, and beheld the same messenger standing over my head, surrounded by light as before. He then again related unto me all that he had related to me the previous night, and commanded me to go to my father and tell him of the vision and commandments which I had received. (Joseph Smith History 1:48-49).
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
	}}		}}

FairMormonBot: Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|think= +)

2017-08-10T06:11:31Z

Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|think= +)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:11, 10 August 2017
Line 310:		Line 310:
	{{MormonThinkIndexClaim		{{MormonThinkIndexClaim
	\|claim=Hyrum, Samuel, Katherine, and Joseph's mother, Lucy, became members of the Presbyterian church after one of these revivals but his father would not join because of some feelings engendered at Alvin's funeral. Thus, by implication, these family members joined near the time of Alvin's death [in November 1823]. Lucy Smith, in her account, indicated that she and several of her family became interested in joining with a church shortly after Alvin's death. This would indicate that they probably joined the Presbyterian church early in 1824.		\|claim=Hyrum, Samuel, Katherine, and Joseph's mother, Lucy, became members of the Presbyterian church after one of these revivals but his father would not join because of some feelings engendered at Alvin's funeral. Thus, by implication, these family members joined near the time of Alvin's death [in November 1823]. Lucy Smith, in her account, indicated that she and several of her family became interested in joining with a church shortly after Alvin's death. This would indicate that they probably joined the Presbyterian church early in 1824.
	~~\|think=~~
	*{{Antispeak\|repeat}}		*{{Antispeak\|repeat}}
	* This claim is false. The "Smith family" did not join the Presbyterian church; Joseph's mother and a few siblings did. Lucy discusses another group to which she was attracted after the First Vision. She and much of the family was inclined thereto: Joseph was not.		* This claim is false. The "Smith family" did not join the Presbyterian church; Joseph's mother and a few siblings did. Lucy discusses another group to which she was attracted after the First Vision. She and much of the family was inclined thereto: Joseph was not.

RogerNicholson at 17:57, 4 August 2017

2017-08-04T17:57:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:57, 4 August 2017
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|>=[[../The Book of Abraham\|The Book of Abraham]]		\|>=[[../The Book of Abraham\|The Book of Abraham]]
	}}		}}
	~~{{ChartMormonThinkTheFirstVision}}~~		[[File:Mormonthink.chart.first.vision.png\|center\|frame]]
	<onlyinclude>		<onlyinclude>
	{{H2		{{H2

RogerNicholson at 15:58, 4 August 2017

2017-08-04T15:58:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 4 August 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{FairMormon}}		{{FairMormon}}
	~~<onlyinclude>~~
	{{H1		{{H1
	\|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Websites/MormonThink/The First Vision		\|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Websites/MormonThink/The First Vision

FairMormonBot: Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|information= +}}\n{{information|)

2017-08-04T15:49:11Z

Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|information= +}}\n{{information|)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:49, 4 August 2017
Line 49:		Line 49:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Visions in the early 1800s were common. In modern times if someone said they had a vision it would seem extraordinary, or more likely not believable. However in the early 1800s having visions wasn't perceived to be all that uncommon. Even Joseph Smith's father claimed to have had a vision - namely the Tree of Life vision. People believed in magic, seer stones, divining rods, etc. and people claiming to have visions weren't seen as all that strange. Like much of Joseph's work, the first vision is strikingly similar to someone else's story.		\|claim=Visions in the early 1800s were common. In modern times if someone said they had a vision it would seem extraordinary, or more likely not believable. However in the early 1800s having visions wasn't perceived to be all that uncommon. Even Joseph Smith's father claimed to have had a vision - namely the Tree of Life vision. People believed in magic, seer stones, divining rods, etc. and people claiming to have visions weren't seen as all that strange. Like much of Joseph's work, the first vision is strikingly similar to someone else's story.
	\|~~information=~~This is true. Joseph was not the only one to report having a vision.		}}
			{{information\|This is true. Joseph was not the only one to report having a vision.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: What is the difference between Joseph Smith's first vision and other reported visions of God at the time?}}		{{:Question: What is the difference between Joseph Smith's first vision and other reported visions of God at the time?}}
Line 142:		Line 143:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=In modern times if someone said they had a vision it would seem extraordinary, or more likely not believable. However in the early 1800s having visions wasn't perceived to be all that uncommon. Even Joseph Smith's father claimed to have had a vision - namely the Tree of Life vision. People believed in magic, seer stones, divining rods, etc. and people claiming to have visions weren't seen as all that strange. Like much of Joseph's work, the first vision is strikingly similar to someone else's story.		\|claim=In modern times if someone said they had a vision it would seem extraordinary, or more likely not believable. However in the early 1800s having visions wasn't perceived to be all that uncommon. Even Joseph Smith's father claimed to have had a vision - namely the Tree of Life vision. People believed in magic, seer stones, divining rods, etc. and people claiming to have visions weren't seen as all that strange. Like much of Joseph's work, the first vision is strikingly similar to someone else's story.
	\|~~information=~~Since visions were not uncommon, that kind of explains why Joseph didn't really mention it to many people, or why many people didn't pay much attention if he did. MormonThink can't have it both ways: it can't be both astonishing that no one remembered Joseph talking about his First Vision in early Palmyra, ''and'' that such things were regarded as common. They ''were'' seen as common (and somewhat disreputable) and so it is no surprise that no one local paid any attention to it at the time. Pastors of that day looked down on people who claimed to see God in a vision - such things were being discouraged. It was the vision of ''Moroni'' and the subsequent recovery and translation of the Book of Mormon that caused Joseph to realize that his path was different than others who had claimed to see visions. Therefore, Joseph emphasized that and only wrote the full account of his First Vision much later.		}}
			{{information\|Since visions were not uncommon, that kind of explains why Joseph didn't really mention it to many people, or why many people didn't pay much attention if he did. MormonThink can't have it both ways: it can't be both astonishing that no one remembered Joseph talking about his First Vision in early Palmyra, ''and'' that such things were regarded as common. They ''were'' seen as common (and somewhat disreputable) and so it is no surprise that no one local paid any attention to it at the time. Pastors of that day looked down on people who claimed to see God in a vision - such things were being discouraged. It was the vision of ''Moroni'' and the subsequent recovery and translation of the Book of Mormon that caused Joseph to realize that his path was different than others who had claimed to see visions. Therefore, Joseph emphasized that and only wrote the full account of his First Vision much later.
	As Richard Bushman noted:		As Richard Bushman noted:
	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
Line 357:		Line 359:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Originally the Doctrine and Covenants contained the Lectures on Faith, put forth as doctrine by Joseph Smith in 1835. The lectures were removed in the 20th century. The Fifth Lecture on Faith specifically states that the Father is a spirit, that only Jesus has a body, and that the Holy Ghost is the Mind of the Father and the Son. If Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon declared this to be doctrine in 1835, it undercuts the two first vision stories (1832 and 1838).		\|claim=Originally the Doctrine and Covenants contained the Lectures on Faith, put forth as doctrine by Joseph Smith in 1835. The lectures were removed in the 20th century. The Fifth Lecture on Faith specifically states that the Father is a spirit, that only Jesus has a body, and that the Holy Ghost is the Mind of the Father and the Son. If Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon declared this to be doctrine in 1835, it undercuts the two first vision stories (1832 and 1838).
	\|~~information=~~There is no documentary evidence that indicates exactly when Joseph Smith learned that God the Father had a glorified and perfected body of flesh and bone. And, despite our typical assumptions, there is also no indication that Joseph learned any such thing during his 1820 First Vision. Regardless of when this revelation was bestowed upon the Prophet, it cannot be established beyond doubt that he was responsible for the teaching about the "spirit" nature of God found in the main text of lecture #5. It may, instead, be true that the Prophet was involved in adjusting the lecture #5 text to conform with his earlier work on the translation of the Bible.		}}
			{{information\|There is no documentary evidence that indicates exactly when Joseph Smith learned that God the Father had a glorified and perfected body of flesh and bone. And, despite our typical assumptions, there is also no indication that Joseph learned any such thing during his 1820 First Vision. Regardless of when this revelation was bestowed upon the Prophet, it cannot be established beyond doubt that he was responsible for the teaching about the "spirit" nature of God found in the main text of lecture #5. It may, instead, be true that the Prophet was involved in adjusting the lecture #5 text to conform with his earlier work on the translation of the Bible.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: What are the Lectures on Faith?}}		{{:Question: What are the Lectures on Faith?}}

FairMormonBot: Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|misinformation= +}}\n{{misinformation|)

2017-08-04T15:40:25Z

Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|misinformation= +}}\n{{misinformation|)

Show changes

FairMormonBot: Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|disinformation= +}}\n{{disinformation|)

2017-08-04T15:36:13Z

Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|disinformation= +}}\n{{disinformation|)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:36, 4 August 2017
Line 149:		Line 149:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Joseph claimed that the neighborhood knew about the vision and persecuted him for it. But evidence indicates that his own family did not know about the vision. If Joseph's story had actually occurred and excited persecution, family members did not talk or write about it in memoirs. The question arises from reasonable investigators, “How could Smith’s family be unaware of his vision while neighbors were persecuting him for it”?		\|claim=Joseph claimed that the neighborhood knew about the vision and persecuted him for it. But evidence indicates that his own family did not know about the vision. If Joseph's story had actually occurred and excited persecution, family members did not talk or write about it in memoirs. The question arises from reasonable investigators, “How could Smith’s family be unaware of his vision while neighbors were persecuting him for it”?
	\|~~disinformation=~~Joseph never said that his vision caused "excited persecution" in his "neighborhood". He described being persecuted for it specifically after talking to a Methodist preacher about it:		}}
			{{disinformation\|Joseph never said that his vision caused "excited persecution" in his "neighborhood". He described being persecuted for it specifically after talking to a Methodist preacher about it:
	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
	"Joseph did tell a Methodist preacher about the First Vision. Newly reborn people customarily talked over their experiences with a clergyman to test the validity of the conversion. The preacher's contempt shocked Joseph. Standing on the margins of the evangelical churches, Joseph may not have recognized the ill repute of visionaries. The preacher reacted quickly and negatively, '''not because of the strangeness of Joseph's story, but because of its familiarity'''. Subjects of revivals all too often claimed to have seen visions.<ref>{{Book:Bushman:Rough Stone Rolling:Short\|pages=40-41}}</ref>		"Joseph did tell a Methodist preacher about the First Vision. Newly reborn people customarily talked over their experiences with a clergyman to test the validity of the conversion. The preacher's contempt shocked Joseph. Standing on the margins of the evangelical churches, Joseph may not have recognized the ill repute of visionaries. The preacher reacted quickly and negatively, '''not because of the strangeness of Joseph's story, but because of its familiarity'''. Subjects of revivals all too often claimed to have seen visions.<ref>{{Book:Bushman:Rough Stone Rolling:Short\|pages=40-41}}</ref>
Line 164:		Line 165:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Historical documents indicate that Joseph was persecuted for engaging in a confidence scheme using a magic rock-in-a-hat to reveal where buried treasure lay beneath the earth’s surface, and later, in 1827, using that same rock-in-the-hat to locate golden plates buried near his home.		\|claim=Historical documents indicate that Joseph was persecuted for engaging in a confidence scheme using a magic rock-in-a-hat to reveal where buried treasure lay beneath the earth’s surface, and later, in 1827, using that same rock-in-the-hat to locate golden plates buried near his home.
	\|~~disinformation=~~Where are these historical documents that indicated that Joseph was persecuted for "engaging in a confidence scheme using a magic rock-in-a-hat"? Are they referring to the 1826 South Bainbridge court appearance? If that is the case, Joseph wasn't convicted or fined at that court appearance. He was never convicted of running a "confidence scheme."		}}
			{{disinformation\|Where are these historical documents that indicated that Joseph was persecuted for "engaging in a confidence scheme using a magic rock-in-a-hat"? Are they referring to the 1826 South Bainbridge court appearance? If that is the case, Joseph wasn't convicted or fined at that court appearance. He was never convicted of running a "confidence scheme."
	}}		}}

Line 287:		Line 289:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=The church’s November 2013 essay and FAIR (an unofficial apologist LDS site) claim that there was a revival in 1820. They use the term revival loosely to help convince investigators that Smith’s claims are correct. An ad in the newspaper for a church camp meeting is not a revival that causes the “religious excitement” that Smith described.		\|claim=The church’s November 2013 essay and FAIR (an unofficial apologist LDS site) claim that there was a revival in 1820. They use the term revival loosely to help convince investigators that Smith’s claims are correct. An ad in the newspaper for a church camp meeting is not a revival that causes the “religious excitement” that Smith described.
	\|~~disinformation=~~No, FairMormon does ''not'' claim that there was a revival in 1820. FairMormon states, based upon newspaper data, that there were Methodist camp meetings being held in the Palmyra area, and that these could account for the "religious excitement". A religious "revival" doesn't have to be formally declared as such in order for a 14-year-old boy to perceive "religious excitement" in the area.		}}
			{{disinformation\|No, FairMormon does ''not'' claim that there was a revival in 1820. FairMormon states, based upon newspaper data, that there were Methodist camp meetings being held in the Palmyra area, and that these could account for the "religious excitement". A religious "revival" doesn't have to be formally declared as such in order for a 14-year-old boy to perceive "religious excitement" in the area.

	The MormonThink author has completely misunderstood the data, and then responded to their own misunderstanding. The newspaper evidence is not "ad in the newspaper for a church camp meeting," and nobody has even claimed that a newspaper ad in 1820 was responsible for any "religious excitement".		The MormonThink author has completely misunderstood the data, and then responded to their own misunderstanding. The newspaper evidence is not "ad in the newspaper for a church camp meeting," and nobody has even claimed that a newspaper ad in 1820 was responsible for any "religious excitement".
Line 373:		Line 376:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Mormon church leaders teach that Joseph had a vision in 1820 and that it has always been the central part of the LDS faith. It teaches a simple, plain truth that God the Father and Jesus Christ were separate beings. But this was not understood by church members during Smith’s lifetime. And as indicated earlier leaders knew little if anything about the “official” account of the first vision story.		\|claim=Mormon church leaders teach that Joseph had a vision in 1820 and that it has always been the central part of the LDS faith. It teaches a simple, plain truth that God the Father and Jesus Christ were separate beings. But this was not understood by church members during Smith’s lifetime. And as indicated earlier leaders knew little if anything about the “official” account of the first vision story.
	\|~~disinformation=~~The separate nature of God and Christ was apparent from the very earliest LDS documents, such as the Book of Mormon. MormonThink plays a good trick with the numbers--note that it is "over 15 years after the event supposedly occurred." Since the vision was in 1820 and the Church wasn't organized until 1830, ten of the fifteen years had already passed. Were future Mormons supposed to be learning Joseph's theology before he had even founded a church? So, MormonThink has already admitted that this was unmistakable within 5 years of the Church's establishment.		}}
			{{disinformation\|The separate nature of God and Christ was apparent from the very earliest LDS documents, such as the Book of Mormon. MormonThink plays a good trick with the numbers--note that it is "over 15 years after the event supposedly occurred." Since the vision was in 1820 and the Church wasn't organized until 1830, ten of the fifteen years had already passed. Were future Mormons supposed to be learning Joseph's theology before he had even founded a church? So, MormonThink has already admitted that this was unmistakable within 5 years of the Church's establishment.

	But, the earliest documents go back even further than that. In 1829, the Book of Mormon was translated:		But, the earliest documents go back even further than that. In 1829, the Book of Mormon was translated:

FairMormonBot: Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|propaganda= +}}\n{{propaganda|)

2017-08-04T15:31:13Z

Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|propaganda= +}}\n{{propaganda|)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:31, 4 August 2017
Line 171:		Line 171:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Joseph did not tell a consistent story, but changed key elements over the years. The date of the vision and his age varies - from 1823 (age 16), to 1821 (age 15), to 1820 (age 14)		\|claim=Joseph did not tell a consistent story, but changed key elements over the years. The date of the vision and his age varies - from 1823 (age 16), to 1821 (age 15), to 1820 (age 14)
	\|~~propaganda=~~Only the first account shows an age discrepancy of age 15 rather than age 14, and the entry regarding the age wasn't even in Joseph Smith's own handwriting.		}}
			{{propaganda\|Only the first account shows an age discrepancy of age 15 rather than age 14, and the entry regarding the age wasn't even in Joseph Smith's own handwriting.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: Are the ages stated in Joseph's accounts of the First Vision 'all over the place?'}}		{{:Question: Are the ages stated in Joseph's accounts of the First Vision 'all over the place?'}}
Line 181:		Line 182:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Joseph did not tell a consistent story, but changed key elements over the years....The reason or motive for seeking divine help changes - from (1) no motive (a spirit appears with the news of gold plates),(2) Bible reading and conviction of sins, (3) a revival, and (4)a desire to know if God existed.		\|claim=Joseph did not tell a consistent story, but changed key elements over the years....The reason or motive for seeking divine help changes - from (1) no motive (a spirit appears with the news of gold plates),(2) Bible reading and conviction of sins, (3) a revival, and (4)a desire to know if God existed.
	\|~~propaganda=~~The author exaggerates perceived differences in the accounts, when in reality the accounts contain primarily the same core details, with some additional details in specific ones. The only major difference is that the 1832 account mentions one personage ("the Lord") instead of two.		}}
			{{propaganda\|The author exaggerates perceived differences in the accounts, when in reality the accounts contain primarily the same core details, with some additional details in specific ones. The only major difference is that the 1832 account mentions one personage ("the Lord") instead of two.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: What was Joseph Smith's motivation for going to the grove to pray in 1820?}}		{{:Question: What was Joseph Smith's motivation for going to the grove to pray in 1820?}}
Line 191:		Line 193:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Joseph did not tell a consistent story, but changed key elements over the years....Who appeared to him? – (1) a spirit, (2)an angel,(3) two angels,(4) Jesus, (5)many angels, and finally, (6) the Father and the Son.		\|claim=Joseph did not tell a consistent story, but changed key elements over the years....Who appeared to him? – (1) a spirit, (2)an angel,(3) two angels,(4) Jesus, (5)many angels, and finally, (6) the Father and the Son.
	\|~~propaganda=~~The author exaggerates perceived differences in the accounts, when in reality the accounts contain primarily the same core details, with some additional details in specific ones. The only major difference is that the 1832 account mentions one personage ("the Lord") instead of two. For example, none of the accounts mention that only an angel appeared, although one mentions the presences of "many angels" in addition to the two personages. Joseph referred to his First Vision as the "First Visitation of angels" and Moroni's visit as "another visitation of angels."		}}
			{{propaganda\|The author exaggerates perceived differences in the accounts, when in reality the accounts contain primarily the same core details, with some additional details in specific ones. The only major difference is that the 1832 account mentions one personage ("the Lord") instead of two. For example, none of the accounts mention that only an angel appeared, although one mentions the presences of "many angels" in addition to the two personages. Joseph referred to his First Vision as the "First Visitation of angels" and Moroni's visit as "another visitation of angels."
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: By what name did Joseph Smith refer to the First Vision?}}		{{:Question: By what name did Joseph Smith refer to the First Vision?}}
Line 256:		Line 259:
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
	Curious investigators and historians wonder if there is evidence of an 1820 revival in the historical record?		Curious investigators and historians wonder if there is evidence of an 1820 revival in the historical record?
	\|~~propaganda=~~MormonThink is begging the question: they are assuming what they want to prove. They are calling these events "a revival," when Joseph never called them by that term.		}}
			{{propaganda\|MormonThink is begging the question: they are assuming what they want to prove. They are calling these events "a revival," when Joseph never called them by that term.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: What religious excitement was occurring in Palmyra in 1820?}}		{{:Question: What religious excitement was occurring in Palmyra in 1820?}}
Line 266:		Line 270:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Marquardt and Walters found multiple sources that revealed evidence of a great religious excitement, with big gains in church membership for all the denominations mentioned by Joseph. It started in the fall of 1824 and continued into the spring of 1825. For the year ending September 1825, the Baptist church recorded 94 admitted on profession of faith and baptism, the Presbyterian church reported 99 new members and the Methodist circuit showed an increase of 208 (p. 27). These facts fit Joseph's description, but not his date for the event.		\|claim=Marquardt and Walters found multiple sources that revealed evidence of a great religious excitement, with big gains in church membership for all the denominations mentioned by Joseph. It started in the fall of 1824 and continued into the spring of 1825. For the year ending September 1825, the Baptist church recorded 94 admitted on profession of faith and baptism, the Presbyterian church reported 99 new members and the Methodist circuit showed an increase of 208 (p. 27). These facts fit Joseph's description, but not his date for the event.
	\|~~propaganda=~~This is irrelevant. There was a revival in 1824-25, but there was also religious excitement and camp meetings in the correct time and place for Joseph's account.		}}
			{{propaganda\|This is irrelevant. There was a revival in 1824-25, but there was also religious excitement and camp meetings in the correct time and place for Joseph's account.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith simply conflate elements of the 1818 and 1824-25 revivals in his story of the First Vision?}}		{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith simply conflate elements of the 1818 and 1824-25 revivals in his story of the First Vision?}}
Line 359:		Line 364:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=But this innovation was advocated in 1784, by Emanuel Swedenborg who wrote a book called Heaven and Hell and Its Wonders. He described his visions of the afterlife. Swedenborg insisted: "There are three heavens," described as "entirely distinct from each other." He called the highest heaven "the Celestial Kingdom," and stated that the inhabitants of the three heavens corresponded to the "sun, moon and stars." Those who have read Swedenborg’s writings wonder if Smith borrowed from him.		\|claim=But this innovation was advocated in 1784, by Emanuel Swedenborg who wrote a book called Heaven and Hell and Its Wonders. He described his visions of the afterlife. Swedenborg insisted: "There are three heavens," described as "entirely distinct from each other." He called the highest heaven "the Celestial Kingdom," and stated that the inhabitants of the three heavens corresponded to the "sun, moon and stars." Those who have read Swedenborg’s writings wonder if Smith borrowed from him.
	\|~~propaganda=~~The claim of "similarity" rests on a few superficial similarities between Joseph and Swedenborg and the Bible—and ignores the many marked differences between them.		}}
			{{propaganda\|The claim of "similarity" rests on a few superficial similarities between Joseph and Swedenborg and the Bible—and ignores the many marked differences between them.
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith derive the idea of "three degrees of glory" from Emanuel Swedenborg's book, ''Heaven and its Wonders and Hell''?}}		{{:Question: Did Joseph Smith derive the idea of "three degrees of glory" from Emanuel Swedenborg's book, ''Heaven and its Wonders and Hell''?}}
Line 403:		Line 409:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=Joseph recounted how the visitation of the angel Moroni happened on September 21, 1823. A reasonable (not anti) question is, “How is it that JS could remember the precise date of the angel's visit in 1823, but could not remember the precise date of God's appearance to him in 1820”?		\|claim=Joseph recounted how the visitation of the angel Moroni happened on September 21, 1823. A reasonable (not anti) question is, “How is it that JS could remember the precise date of the angel's visit in 1823, but could not remember the precise date of God's appearance to him in 1820”?
	\|~~propaganda=~~Because he was 14 years old. He probably didn't even know the date.		}}
			{{propaganda\|Because he was 14 years old. He probably didn't even know the date.
	}}		}}

Line 410:		Line 417:
	\|title=MormonThink		\|title=MormonThink
	\|claim=How do we know that it wasn't Satan (if he exists) that appeared to Joseph?		\|claim=How do we know that it wasn't Satan (if he exists) that appeared to Joseph?
	\|~~propaganda=~~Seriously? This is an argument put forth by ''non-believing'' critics?		}}
			{{propaganda\|Seriously? This is an argument put forth by ''non-believing'' critics?
	}}		}}
	{{:Question: Could Moroni have been an "angel of Satan"?}}		{{:Question: Could Moroni have been an "angel of Satan"?}}