Why Are There Different Accounts of the First Vision? - Church History Matters Podcast

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 23 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 33

  • @CarolinaCoxes
    @CarolinaCoxes Рік тому +13

    This is my favorite podcast. Scott Woodward and Casey Griffiths are very likable teachers with a tremendous knowledge of church history and doctrine. I look forward to every Tuesday when their new episode comes out. At the time of this writing, they are on Episode 39 so if you are starting now, you have a very enlightening journey ahead of you. Keep it up Scott, Casey, Gabe Davis, Nick Galieti and the rest of the crew, your efforts and your talents are greatly appreciated.

  • @bestill-now
    @bestill-now Рік тому +1

    I love these podcasts and appreciate the valuable information.

  • @MsEva9470
    @MsEva9470 Рік тому +1

    Thank you like church history thank you again

  • @b.j.3729
    @b.j.3729 Рік тому +2

    I love this podcast! Their logic makes perfect sense. I love listening to people who are well-credentialed and explain things so well. It goes to show there are always answers to questions. More importantly, the Spirit testifies that Joseph Smith was/is a true prophet and that his visions really did happen, ushering in the restoration of all things. I've personally experienced the fruit of his work.

  • @galenswenson9785
    @galenswenson9785 7 місяців тому +2

    I admire the attempt to reconcile difficult parts of church history. To suggest that accounts of the 1st vision can make sense if go into the process with a trusting mindset is interesting.
    Unfortunately, I think you then must go into other potential religious queries with a similar mindset. For example Catholic truth claims deserve a similar mindset.

  • @maxinefely5875
    @maxinefely5875 Рік тому +5

    I am loving your podcast....and expect to learn alot. I am off put by your interlude music. It jars my concentration with its loud discordance. Please consider adjusting that part of your podcast. Thanks

    • @b.j.3729
      @b.j.3729 Рік тому +1

      I agree! GREAT podcast, but the music doesn't fit.

  • @colbiecoonc78
    @colbiecoonc78 5 місяців тому

    Amazing ...appreciate this!!

  • @RyanMercer
    @RyanMercer Рік тому +4

    👍

  • @davidtorbenson4686
    @davidtorbenson4686 11 місяців тому +2

    I think the controversial part of the 1832 vision is that the church was taught through decades that as soon as the visitation occurred, Joseph's priority (and purpose for going into the grove) was to find out which church was true - that is, according to scripture - what was on the top of Joseph's mind, and his priority question was which church he should join. Suddenly, the church is asking people to accept that - well, maybe that was not really what was the top of Joseph's mind. My experience in discussing this topic with members who struggle is just this point.
    Had it not been tucked away by Joseph Fielding Smith - and been released when found, I think it would not be such an issue today. Because the timing of the release coincided with a lot of other information coming out that was different than the "primary version" - for many, the perspective of trust was damaged.
    Hence the need for podcasts like this - because, as Elder Ballard taught. "well meaning leaders" were selective in what they shared. In many cases, as I have discussed with individuals, the "hiding and reluctance to be fully transparent" ends up being as much of an issue, or more, than the lack of a clearly identified Father and Son

    • @mindsamazing9179
      @mindsamazing9179 7 місяців тому

      This is so true. And it’s frustrating to come and listen to a podcast like this who still decides to lie and break member’s trust by saying things like “well the first account was randomly found because the historical documents were all just a big mess and we just happened upon it” instead of actually talking about Joseph Fielding Smith hiding the document from the church. STOP GASLIGHTING THE MEMBERS!!! WE ARE REAL PEOPLE WITH REAL LIVES!!!

  • @DarrylDriggs-co8bx
    @DarrylDriggs-co8bx 15 днів тому

    The Joseph Smith Testimony 1838 is a LITMUS TEST for the sincere seeker of truth and honest in heart. The 1832 account is in outline form, and is sequential or chronological. The 16 is not clearly written in the account and might be “15th year of my age”. “First Vision”, Milton V. Blackman, Jr. Appendix A.

  • @nathanmarchant2175
    @nathanmarchant2175 10 місяців тому

    Excellent commentaries by Woodward & Griffiths!
    You guys remind me of 21st century Truman G Madson

  • @davidtorbenson4686
    @davidtorbenson4686 11 місяців тому

    You comments on the perspective people bring into the content is great (trust vs suspicion) - the "suspicious" story of the 1832 vision is that Joseph Fielding Smith ripped it out and put it in his personal safe (I think the storing in his safe when he was church historian is fairly established fact -per the FAIR site).... and it was only when word leaked out, and critics of the church forced the church's hand.
    Your summary either omits these details on purpose or has a different conclusion of the facts. Do you have a different perspective? If your explanation is that " back then, there was "unorganized records" that resulted in this loss" -that seems to be purposefully vague to be able to avoid discussing why Joseph Fielding Smith cut it out....

  • @JonLeavitt
    @JonLeavitt 11 місяців тому

    TL;DR; there are different versions because because Joseph Smith changed the story depending on time and the audience.
    While it doesn't prove that they are all false, it does prove that none are 100% true.

  • @unclebart100
    @unclebart100 9 місяців тому

    Not sure why a single verse of the Book of Mormon is proof enough that Joseph had an understanding of the nature of the Godhead. When there are many many more Book of Mormon verses, including the testimonies of the 3 and 8 witnesses, that are trinitarian. Many of those verses were edited later in futute revisions to remove trinitatian interpretations.

    • @jeremims9044
      @jeremims9044 4 місяці тому

      The testimonies of the 3 and 8 shouldn't matter. There is no indication they knew what JS saw in his 1st vision, and they never claimed to see such a vision themselves. Therefore it would be perfectly reasonable for them to have such a viewpoint in their statement

    • @unclebart100
      @unclebart100 3 місяці тому

      ​@@jeremims9044 and who wrote the witness statements? Oh, Joseph Smith. All the witnesses contributed was their signature.

  • @lindamartinez7006
    @lindamartinez7006 Рік тому

    Verify it then .

  • @craigolsen8057
    @craigolsen8057 Рік тому +2

    Why do you call Joseph Smith a pathetic young farm boy? In what way was he pathetic? To me this is offensive

    • @andrewdurfee3896
      @andrewdurfee3896 Рік тому +9

      By the standards of the world an unlearned farm boy is pathetic and by there standards shouldn’t be who you turn to inquire knowledge. In the context used the presenter is saying that God appeared to someone who would be pathetic or low. Jesus likewise didn’t come to the world in a royal setting even though he was royal. I wouldn’t call Joseph Smith pathetic myself, but I get the usage he is using here. Basically God can use the weak things of the world to do his work. I would say however that it was good for God to use the unlearned Joseph Smith since he had a lot less to unlearn of false teachings of the world. Anyways that’s my perspective on the matter.

    • @ginnymart5124
      @ginnymart5124 Рік тому

      Hello Andrew. I'm also a Durfee and LOVE the gospel. Love your insight. ​@@andrewdurfee3896

    • @james8996
      @james8996 Рік тому

      He was Pathetic and a liar and the dumbest false prophet who ever lived

  • @mcsq5899
    @mcsq5899 Рік тому +2

    For the real story see Dan Vogel or Sandra Tanner.

    • @b.j.3729
      @b.j.3729 Рік тому +1

      Hahahahaha!

    • @james8996
      @james8996 Рік тому

      ​@@b.j.3729 The Bible Says that Jesus the Father and the Angels and the 12 tribes of Israel are all black,

  • @dr33776
    @dr33776 Рік тому

    How convenient you don't mention how is it that the 1832 account was "lost". It wasn't lost, it was cut off the journal, hidden in a safe for 30 years, and then pasted back with tape once word got out of a "odd" first vision account. If the accounts complement each other and are harmonious, why the need to hide it in a safe for decades? Be honest, especially since this is easily verifiable history.