Stake President Response Part 1

Introduction

Here is the audio clip for part 1, and here is its transcript.

(If you would like to see the whole thing, go to the links in the Introduction.)

Most of the first half is the bishop taking care of ward business and introduction by the Stake President. Nothing to really argue or report for this, but I think it’s interesting that he’s telling people it’s OK to go to sleep and not listen. I wonder if he’s concerned that talking about these issues might cause others to fall away.

He brings up Gordon Hinckley, the previous president of the church, as a way of opening up the topic of whether Joseph Smith’s endeavors were fraudulent or not.

“The question is whether or not the gospel has really been restored as President Hinckley testified it was through the prophet Joseph Smith.”

Call me a nit-picker, but there should probably be a distinction between “the gospel of Jesus Christ” and the “restoration of the CoJCoLDS.” I realize that often, members of the LDS church use the terms interchangeably, but  the difference is that the “gospel” is the good news of Jesus’ atonement and resurrection, while the restoration of the church is more of what we now know as the corporate structure. There is a difference, though of late (last 40-50 years) they tend to promote the two of them as the same thing. Rock Waterman, a faithful member of the church pictured here, has an entire blog that deals with following the gospel while not buying into the corporation, but this post in particular addresses the issue.

The other big thing in this segment is Moroni’s visit to Joseph Smith and the First Vision. Let’s tackle the First Vision first. The LDS church recently started putting out a series of “essays” on their website.

As it turns out, there are multiple accounts of the First Vision, each with different details that are a bit contradictory. Also, there isn't any evidence that it was taught until long after it happened, and that there is some confusion between the details of the “grove visit of Heavenly Father and Jesus” and the “Moroni visit” in journals, including Lucy Mack Smith’s writings.

One of the things that strike me as weird is that the Moroni visit account is oddly specific, including the date and the scriptures that were quoted. The First Vision accounts, on the other hand, are somewhat more vague, including the date on which it happened and how old he was when it occurred (cross reference the dates for when the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods were restored – one has a really specific date and details, the other does not).

Another thing that he fails to bring up is that in one account, Joseph Smith said he was praying to learn if there was a supreme being or not on the night of September 22, 1823. One would think that having seen a pair of them several years ago, he wouldn't need to ask that kind of question again. Also, in a lot of the earlier accounts he reported the angel as having the name of Nephi, not Moroni.

When judging a court case, we are held to the standard of “beyond reasonable doubt,” and there is plenty of room to doubt. Read some of the information in the links and you might see why. All of the information in the links is taken from contemporary accounts and journals.

Continued in Part 2

(Authored by Joseph)