- Since the word angels is capitalized it must be referring to Deity thereby contradicting other accounts who refer to a visitation by the Father and the Son.
- The Official History of the Church was falsified because this contradiction isn't noted.
Both of these claims are weak. What really happened that day in 1820 is that Heavenly Father appeared with the Savior, accompanied by angels. The upper-case detail is trivial and simply is what an unlearned man, in an era before grammar had been standardized, wrote. To find fault with this account over this detail is evidence of the paucity of arguments by our opponents. Come on guys, you could at least make it challenging. It isn't even any fun shooting down such pathetic attempts to smear the Prophet of the Restoration. If this is all you have its a wonder everyone doesn't join the Mormon Church. These arguments are beyond lame.
Hardly lame John. You know I love you buddy, but let me be harsh.
ReplyDeleteThe many various versions of the supposed First Vision (there wasn't one) are but a drop in the bucket of a huge swath of evolving Mormon doctrines - blacks policy and changes in temple doctrine being among the more recent ones.
Both changes were for convenience, and nothing to do with revelation.
And Mormon apologists doing acrobatics - like your posts - are trying to defend the ridiculous.
If one wants to split hairs, anything is defendable, but the First Vision, the Book of Mormon, and many other aspects of Mormonism just don't add up. It's only supported by BYU academics; most others can see all the gaps.
Why do apologists defend the church? Because they and long-time Mormons are invested. If you've paid 10 percent of your income and donated huge amounts of your life to a cult over 30-plus years - like many have - then the church must be "true"; otherwise it's all been a waste.
But there is hope: my dad resigned in his early 70s, and has been much happier ever since.
Resigning in 2001 - after many years of inactivity - was one of the best things I ever did. You should consider it - you'd have a better life, without all the unnecessary stress.
Love ya John!
Mark : )
Mark G.,
ReplyDeleteI know that this post has long lay dormant, but as I have stumbled upon it and have read your thoughts I thought that I too would issue my discretion. I felt that you personally failed to contradicted rookies thoughts on the matter of whether the differences in the various accounts of the First Vision detract from the fact of its actual occurrence. To maliciously attack anyone for faithfully obeying the law of tithing is only further evidence that you have nothing to say on this matter other than, "I don't agree." Post something of substance not of a vendetta.
It is a known fact the Joseph was poorly educated. It is also known that he publicly spoke about his experience with many individuals all of which were not verbatim. The church, through divine guidance published the one acceptable version of the multitude that were present. A final statement as it were.
Mark G. What are your thoughts? No personal attacks. Attack the topic.