WHICH 'vision' was that?
As a LAWYER, you KNOW that OTHER evidence in the trial that you cannot explain will DESTROY your case:
|
| |||||||
| Version Number When Published Brief Description |
Age Year |
Pillar of light |
No. of Person- ages |
Father Present |
Son Present |
Question: Join What Sect? |
Remarks-References |
|
1. Offical version, written 1838,
first Published 1842
(There are minor differences between the various source references,
Ensign Jan 1985, page 14)
|
14
1820 |
yes | 2 |
yes
Both spoke |
yes |
Join none |
Lucy, Hyrum, Samuel, Sophronia join the Presbyterian Church - JSH, pages 49-50, 1981 edition;
Times & Seasons, March, April 1842;
Ensign Jan. 1985, page 14;
Joseph Smith's First Vision by
Milton V. Backamn, Bookcraft, 1971, 1980, Appendix C, page 160f
|
| 2. Dictated by Smith to F.G. Williams, Summer to Nov. 1832 | 14 or 15 | yes |
1 | no |
yes Saw Lord, He "spoke" |
No question,
told "None doeth good",
sins forgiven
|
Joseph Smith's First Vision, Appendix A, page 155f |
|
3. Written by Smith,
his 1832 diary,
in his own hand
|
15 |
yes |
1 |
no |
yes Saw the Lord Jesus Christ |
No question,
told sins forgiven,
all do no good
|
Ensign, Dec. 1984, pages 24-26; ibid, Jan. 1985, page 11 |
|
4. Smith's diary of 1835,
recorded by
Warren Cowdery,
Nov. 9, 1835, conversation of Smith with Joshua
|
About 14 |
yes |
One, then another like unto first |
?
|
?
Second spoke, saw many angels
|
No questions,
told sins forgiven,
Jesus is Son
|
Joseph Smith's First Vision, Appen. B |
|
5. Letter form Smith to
John Wentworth,
editor of Chicago Democrat
|
none |
no |
2 |
? They spoke |
? |
No Question |
Joseph Smith's First Vision, Appendix D;
Ensign, Jan 1985, page 16;
Times & Seasons, Vol 3, pages 706-707, March 1, 1842
|
|
6. Early church leaders
Brigham Young, G.A.Smith,
John Taylor
|
15 |
no |
1 Saw an angel, and asked the angel |
no |
no |
Join none |
See Journal of Discourses,
2:17;
18:239;
13:77, 78;
20:167;
12:333, 334.
|
+++
It has been shown again and again that if YOU USE the same standard on PAUL'S FIRST VISION, you will also prove it to be false.
Yet you choose not to post that part of the truth when you repeat and repeat this cut and past.
Looks like another case of lets not bother with the rest of the facts, they do not fit what you want people to think about this Church.
(Please remember, it is only your standard that proves Paul to be a false apostle)