DiscussMormonism.com

Joseph Smith's First Vision and His Conflicting Accounts

by:
Mormon Infographics

afterallwecando wrote:Joseph Smith's First Vision and His Conflicting Accounts

by:
Mormon Infographics

the differences are seemingly just with the emphasis or detail...when looked at as "complete" or even in comparison there is no "conflict".
Perhaps you could elaborate on what is intended by "conflicting"?

subgenius wrote:the differences are seemingly just with the emphasis or detail...when looked at as "complete" or even in comparison there is no "conflict".
Perhaps you could elaborate on what is intended by "conflicting"?

Just one example is the 1835 to Jewish Minister:
"a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame which was spread all around, and yet nothing consumed"

vs

1838 Official it's just a sunbeam

To me, they conflict, you may disagree and that is fine.

afterallwecando wrote:Just one example is the 1835 to Jewish Minister:
"a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame which was spread all around, and yet nothing consumed"

vs

1838 Official it's just a sunbeam

To me, they conflict, you may disagree and that is fine.

i hate to be picky, but that example is hardly convincing nor deserving of a claim for "conflicting".
A pillar of fire and a beam of sunlight can certainly be considered similar enough and only poetically different.
Even if they were to be considered different in terms of intensity, i don't consider that fulfilling of the meaning for "conflicting".

Do, you have any others? Because again, the info-graphic you posted illuminates nothing of conflict nor cast any shadow of doubt. Few accounts of anything made over years and over many times among many ever have a strict adherence to detail...but i am curious as to what point you are contending merits the use of "conflicting".

I am not sure why but when I was in process of leaveing the church and losing my "testimony" the multiple versions of the first vision didn't really bothered me. I guess in this case I was willing to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt and assume that he tailored the versions to his audience and the fact that if it really did happen that it would have been such an overwhelming event that he might not remember exactly how it happened so his imagination filled in gaps. Of couse now I don't beleive it happened at all now.

son of Ishmael wrote:I am not sure why but when I was in process of leaveing the church and losing my "testimony" the multiple versions of the first vision didn't really bothered me. I guess in this case I was willing to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt and assume that he tailored the versions to his audience and the fact thagt if it really did happen that it would have been such an overwhelming event that he might not remember exactly how it happened so his imagination filled in gaps. Of couse now I don't beleive it happened at all now.

And the reason is that you didn't do what you should have and sought out God and spoke with him yourself. If you want to know if Joseph Smith spoke the truth, go SPEAK WITH GOD YOURSELF.

Tobin wrote:

son of Ishmael wrote:I am not sure why but when I was in process of leaveing the church and losing my "testimony" the multiple versions of the first vision didn't really bothered me. I guess in this case I was willing to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt and assume that he tailored the versions to his audience and the fact thagt if it really did happen that it would have been such an overwhelming event that he might not remember exactly how it happened so his imagination filled in gaps. Of couse now I don't beleive it happened at all now.

And the reason is that you didn't do what you should have and sought out God and spoke with him yourself. If you want to know if Joseph Smith spoke the truth, go SPEAK WITH GOD YOURSELF.

Tobin, Why is it that you ASSume to know what we did or did not do? I prayed and fasted harder on my way out of the Church than I did on my way in. I did not want to leave and was sure all the way to the very last that I was going to come out of that dark tunnel and still be a member.

son of Ishmael wrote:I am not sure why but when I was in process of leaveing the church and losing my "testimony" the multiple versions of the first vision didn't really bothered me. I guess in this case I was willing to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt and assume that he tailored the versions to his audience and the fact that if it really did happen that it would have been such an overwhelming event that he might not remember exactly how it happened so his imagination filled in gaps. Of couse now I don't beleive it happened at all now.

It didn't bother me either, although when I look at it now I see more then just an evolution in the story, but evolution in doctrine that follows what Joseph was doing.

son of Ishmael wrote:

Tobin, Why is it that you ASSume to know what we did or did not do? I prayed and fasted harder on my way out of the Church than I did on my way in. I did not want to leave and was sure all the way to the very last that I was going to come out of that dark tunnel and still be a member.

LOL I think he deserves that one considering how he is so judgmental of anyone who disagrees with his take. He claims he was not seeking as well when he thinks God showed up. Even if we assume God did show up, he would still have no idea what it means to seek God in this fashion, since he never has.