First Vision: Did Joseph hallucinate?

[MrNirom]

If Jesus (being in spirit form) was the God of the Old Testament.. would he not also be the God of the Book of Mormon?

I don't know why man insists on complicating matters.

I was talking with my wife last night and a revelation came to me.

Christians had to create a better God than their multi God believing friends. I mean.. how impressive is it to have a God that looks like us.. and has a body of flesh and bone? That just isn't "God" enough.. So let us go and create an image of our God.. that is superior than all other Gods.. and the only way we can do this is to make sure that our God is not so easy to understand. For if he were.. he would not be God.

[Dale]

Some are proposing that the idea of a distinct Father and Son Gods was once doctrine in ancient Judaism. The Book of Mormon does not teach them as Gods as to them there was only one God. Any theology that may have pre-dated them they seemingly abandoned in favor of later developing mono-theism. I do not reject the research, and use some of it myself. It is evidence Joseph Smiths idea of Gods may have been a restoration of ancient ideas. But i am cautious with the research as research can be wrong.

The real problem with the research is i cannot prove it from a KJV Bible. And FARMs has been dare i say unwise not to get into print books of essays that explore such topics. The way they do such now is to rely on its Review of Books format way to much. I like FAIR better. I just happily bought a copy their new book by Mike Ash entitled Shaken Faith Syndrome. I like the format of such books to handle issues. But with this research i have no such book yet. One would have to become an expert on the research to present and defend it properly.

I think Margaret Barkers The Great Angel book presents her research. But i have not bought a copy. I may have remembered the title way wrong.

I do not by the way see the Trinity idea as strict mono-theism. Orthodox Jewish mono-theists also see the Trinity idea a qualifying mono-theism. The idea of distinct persons within God is to them and me is close to the idea of Gods. This is not supposed to be a problem for the Trinity, but its a problem i am honest about.

I myself see the idea of them being aware of each other as making them almost defineable as persons. Those who wrote the creeds did not mean they were modern persons when they called them persons. They meant to avoid the idea of Gods that they were like the persons an actor would play in a play. But the distinct parts of God though not supposed to be separate are not like the persons of an actor plays because communication takes place between the parts of God.

Jesus himself in Mark 12:29 affirms the mono-theism of his day as true doctrine. It is perfectly ok in light of the scriptures to see the Father and Son as the same being God. It is perfectly ok to pray to them as the same God. It is ok to worship them as the same God. Anything else that goes beyond that is getting into subjects true or false man is not ready for.

The policy Hyrum Smith put out before Joseph Smiths death was to ex-communicate elders for teaching mysteries. He felt if God commanded it such teaching was ok as in the case of his brother. But he felt without a specific commandment such an early LDS was guilty of false teaching. Basically he felt teaching God was a personage of spirit was the only doctrine the elders should be getting into. The Community of Christ just continued a policy Hyrum Smith and his brother started. The letter to Brother Hewitt if i recall his name right is online at the last new article to be added in the Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy section at the Restoration Bookstore.

To me the difficulty in getting into teaching the mysteries because of opposition is the best reason not to share everything you know to mankind. To me not getting into mysteries is based on the same wise reason LDS cannot talk about certain temple things. As long as one has nasty people out to demean the sacred its best to not share all the mysteries or sacred things you know.

And what if your mystery came from man, or the Devil? Prophets can be very wrong. I have seen a quote from i think Orson Hyde where Joseph Smith suggested a key to test his revelations. He knew the Devil and man could produce also produce a revelation. So his idea was to let all the leading quorums approve the revelation before it going to the people. That way the revelation ran into a serious concern snag in discussion it could be stopped before going to the people. The idea is if it passed discussion and got approved for being given to the people it was of God.

[Maureen]

The problem with the Trinity is that NO ONE can understand it. It is by definition a mystery.

I disagree. I understand the doctrine of the Trinity the best I can; that is why I believe it. No one can understand God completely, because God is an infinite divine being, while mankind is finite and human.

Too many "Trinitarians" do not believe in the Trinity, but in modalism, which was condemned by St Augustine as heresy. Modalism is easier to understand.

It is true that many people, not necessarily trinity believers, confuse the trinity with modalism.

The description Maureen gives is a balance between a Trinity and modalistic viewpoint. Most I've spoken with, however, give modalist descriptions.

I disagree again. If you look at both definitions you can see a distinct difference:

Modalism:

In Christianity, Sabellianism (also known as modalism, modalistic monarchianism, or modal monarchism) is the nontrinitarian belief that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son and Holy Spirit are different modes or aspects of one God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three distinct persons in God Himself.

Modalism - Information from Reference.com

Trinity

The Trinity is a Christian doctrine, stating that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons:[1] the Father, the Son (incarnate as Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. Since the beginning of the third century[2] the doctrine of the Trinity has been stated as "that the one God exists in three Persons and one substance, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit".[3] Trinitarianism, belief in the Trinity, is a mark of Oriental and Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and all the mainstream traditions arising from the Protestant Reformation, such as Anglicanism, Lutheranism and Presbyterianism; and the Trinity has been described as "the central dogma of Christian theology".[3]

Trinity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

M.

[Islander]

A lot of the dissenting opinions are part of the traditions inherited from the Nicaean council and not necessarily from the description on the NT.

For the uninitiated and without any help from the theologians, the NT offers multiple opportunities to believe that the Father and the Son are two distinct and different personages. The scriptures are sufficiently transparent to discern that Jesus proclaims himself the Son of God, the Messiah, the Lamb of God and working and preaching/teaching the kingdom on behalf of his Father. Further along, Paul and others describe the Lamb sitting at the right hand of God.

They felt FORCED to come up with a theological explanation for the trinity because of the monotheistic nature of the OT and the absolute mandate of YHW for Israel not to worship any other gods. Now, in the same OT, YHW proclaims that he is the Savior, the Redeemer, the Creator. The same attributes and claims that were made by Jesus later in the NT. So, they HAD to come up with a theological rather than natural explanation and the claim of a mystery. But that is not how the scriptures read. I suggest that the Spirit would lead most (without exposure to prejudicial theological theories) to believe that the trinity is made out of 3 distinct personages rather than 1 mysterious God that requires a PhD in divinity to explain itself.

I grew up in an island in the middle of nowhere without teachers of religion of any kind. Over my dinner table and without any help and reading an old tattered bible, my grandmother said "YHW is Jesus and, Jesus is the Son of God-the-Father-of-ALL spirits. And the Holy Ghost speaks the truth to our hearts when man won't."

I think the academic debate was put to rest with the testimony of Joseph. but friends, you are free to believe as you wish.

Edited July 5, 2008 by Islander

[Maureen]

Here are three examples of the Trinity through LDS scripture:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew 28:19)

Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil. (Alma 11:44)

Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen. (D&C 20:28)

M.

[VisionOfLehi]

That doesn't support the Trinity. You can't quote one scripture without relevant scriptures as well, when trying to discuss a whole topic.

And that refers to the Godhead, not a single Trinitarian God. Or do you presume to interpret LDS scripture contrary to the teachings of the LDS prophets?

I see a common theme when people try to "prove" or "counter" LDS beliefs and concepts: They live out some of the relevant scriptures that don't support their side.

[Maureen]

That doesn't support the Trinity. You can't quote one scripture without relevant scriptures as well, when trying to discuss a whole topic.

If you're looking for context, you can go to all three scripture verses and read the whole chapter of each. The verses still show trinity characteristics.

And that refers to the Godhead, not a single Trinitarian God. Or do you presume to interpret LDS scripture contrary to the teachings of the LDS prophets?

In a few circles Godhead and Trinity can be synonymous.

I see a common theme when people try to "prove" or "counter" LDS beliefs and concepts: They live out some of the relevant scriptures that don't support their side.

And you would prefer to leave out the scripture that does support the Trinity doctrine? Is that it?

M.

[VisionOfLehi]

No, I wouldn't leave it out, because it doesn't support Trinity, it supports the Godhead. I would take those scriptures and add to them the ones that clarify the separateness of the Godhead.

We have the fullness of the Gospel, but it's contained in all the standard works, when you take in the complete message, not bits and pieces.

[Maureen]

No, I wouldn't leave it out, because it doesn't support Trinity, it supports the Godhead. I would take those scriptures and add to them the ones that clarify the separateness of the Godhead.

We have the fullness of the Gospel, but it's contained in all the standard works, when you take in the complete message, not bits and pieces.

Here are some scriptures I found related to the corporeal body of God:

The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. (D&C 130:22)

In the image of his own body, male and female, created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created and became living souls in the land upon the footstool of God. (Moses 6:9)

All the other scriptures were mainly inferring that man was created in the image of God. I realize that LDS interpret this as the Father having a body of flesh and bones, but even OT and NT scriptures have these proclamations and mainstream Christianity and myself can see the Trinity in this. God is the Father, Son and HS and man is body, mind and spirit.

I also found another scripture:

Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh. (Ether 3:16)

This is Christ speaking to the brother of Jared. If this body was visible but still spiritual, is it possible that what JS thought was corporeal, when he says he saw the Father and Son, was really spiritual for both the Father and the Son?

M.

[VisionOfLehi]

his is Christ speaking to the brother of Jared. If this body was visible but still spiritual, is it possible that what JS thought was corporeal, when he says he saw the Father and Son, was really spiritual for both the Father and the Son?

M.

No. Jared saw Christ BEFORE Christ came to Earth to receive his mortal body.

After Christ died, He had His glorified, physical body. This is when He appeared to Joseph.

Now, if you look at the first D&C you posted, that explains that.

17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

27 And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first.

1 And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor. 2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.

Now... We see that they have 2 separate bodies, and you've clarified for us that they are now flesh and bone, save the HG. We see further that they are NOT the same person, of a Trinity, because if the wording that would include Christ in the Trinity would have to include Satan in some Holy Quartet. He was the same in the beginning, he speaks to God in the beginning. In fact, he's referred to in much the same manner, save he's not the Beloved or Chosen one.

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

If we all may be one, JUST as the Father and the Son are, does that make us all different aspects of the same person? And since we may be one in Them, JUST as They are one in each Other, than that makes us all part of the "Trinity," too.

6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Note, it says one God AND Father. Not just One God. It's placing one "aspect" of the Trinity clearly above the other. Now, if there were a Trinity, would it not be "GOD" above them all? The composite of the Triune? How can a part be greater than the whole?

D&C 76 also helps clarify the nature of the Godhead.

Jesus was the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father, the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh, and the first to rise from the dead in the resurrection

And for the rest, we have modern revelation:

LDS.org - Ensign

Preach My Gospel

[Maureen]

...We see further that they are NOT the same person, of a Trinity, because if the wording that would include Christ in the Trinity would have to include Satan in some Holy Quartet. He was the same in the beginning, he speaks to God in the beginning. In fact, he's referred to in much the same manner, save he's not the Beloved or Chosen one.

It is apparent that you are not understanding the wording of the Trinity, because the Trinity agrees that each person of the Godhead (Trinity) are in fact distinct from each other. The Father is a person (or as LDS say personage), the Son a separate person, and the HS also a separate person. But they are all God collectively or individually. They have the same, unique, one of a kind nature, which is their divinity. They have always been God before time existed because they created time and space. Satan could not possibly be included in this tri-unity because he is an angel, a created being. Satan is no where equal to God.

If we all may be one, JUST as the Father and the Son are, does that make us all different aspects of the same person?

This again is a good example of not understanding what the Trinity really is.

Note, it says one God AND Father. Not just One God. It's placing one "aspect" of the Trinity clearly above the other. Now, if there were a Trinity, would it not be "GOD" above them all? The composite of the Triune? How can a part be greater than the whole?

God and the Father are synonymous. God is the Father and the Father is God, there is no separation of the two. You cannot divide or separate God into parts.

M.

[Dale]

At most i am open to is a pre-incarnate form being created for Jesus uncreated personality. Not buying into he spirit birth idea i believe Jesus created the spirits. I do not accept the heavenly mother idea as anything but a religious speculation.

Joseph Smith does not have appeared to have taught spirits were born. His esoteric speculation that conflicts with scripture was that spirits were uncreated. He taught physical children were born via heavenly parents. But as God the Father had no such physical children in the resurrection that only leaves him now spiritually adopting children now. Unless DNA is taken from such beings to give future worlds parental diversity i see no purpose in eternal marriage, or eternal polygamy. Van Hale LDS radio talk show host has a paper on it at Mormon Miscellaneous.

With John 17:21,22 i see LDS apologists sometimes a victim of not reading out side their apologetics. In no way can we, or Jesus the man go beyond the oneness of purpose suggested by the verse. But in Jesus the verses may be read as saying the exclusive everwhere present God dwelt in Jesus and that was what made that one in purpose. The same God via the spirit can dwell in us enabling us to be one with that exclusive omnmi-present God as they are one.

In brief the answer is the same God can dwell in many different persons. Thus enabling many persons including Jesus the man to be one in purpose with God. But John 17:21,22 is not about God being more than one God, or that Jesus the spirit part was a 2nd God. Why can't two true truths exist as a parodox?

Edited July 6, 2008 by Dale

[rameumptom]

Once again, the Trinity is not something to comprehend. It is a mystery. The Trinity are three persons in one God. How that works, no one has ever been able to explain completely to me. They are the same being, but three persons. They are not three aspects of one being, as that is modalism.

LDS believe in a social Trinity - where the 3 persons are physically separate, but the same in all other aspects in the Godhead. Some, but still few, traditional Christian scholars are beginning to accept this concept of the Trinity.

But the traditional view of the Trinity does become an issue in trying to explain the ancient view of Jews and Christians towards the Trinity. They believed in an anthropomorphic God. That is very clear from the early writings in the Bible and external books. The Divine Council is an early Hebrew/Semitic belief that comes into play here. El Elyon has 70 sons, each of them a divine being. Each is given a kingdom to rule over as god. Yahweh/Jehovah is given Israel as his kingdom, being the favorite kingdom and favorite son of El. Over time, due to political intrigue and sloppiness, many of the gods fall, until Yahweh rules all the kingdoms. Sons of Yahweh are the mortals that he has created. With Dale, we LDS agree that Christ/Yahweh created mortal man in conjunction with Elohim, but the divine spirits are El Elyon's creation.

We see this divine council in Isaiah 6 and Abraham 3. We see Satan and other divine sons of El go to challenge Yahweh for his preeminence in Job 1. Representative of the divine council, Moses and the 70 elders of Israel go to the mountain top and eat, with Yahweh present.

Margaret Barker, Methodist preacher and OT scholar, stated that early Christians saw Jesus as the fulfillment of Yahweh, the Angel of the Lord's Presence. In his resurrection, he showed the way for perfected and divine beings.

After the Nicene Council in 325 AD, the Trinity slowly gained strength. However, there were still issues on the Trinity. Some insisted that Jesus only was fully divine, and not mortal. This view was finally ended over a century later, in the Council at Chalcedon, where he was proclaimed fully divine and fully mortal, the duality of Christ. But while this was proclaimed, it adds yet another layer of mystery on the Trinity. How can God, who is of a holy and different substance than man, be resurrected with a physical body of imperfect matter AND still be a pure Spirit?

The LDS view that God and Jesus are two physically separate beings of Spirit embodied in physical bodies, and that spirit is of matter, just like we are, denotes that no duality or mystery need occur to understand God. There is a natural transition for the sons of El and of Yahweh, from spirit being to mortal being to resurrected being. Of course, this brings up the issue of creatio ex nihilo, but that's another thread....