How Do I Judge the Evidence of the First Vision?

Whether we realize it or not, we make judgments about everything we experience. As I have studied the First Vision, I have made judgments about what I think of the evidence. Or in other words, I have formed my own personal opinions based on what I have read. I have read and listened to the opinions of others, but I have attempted to form my own conclusions.

As you have studied the First Vision, have you formed your own opinions based on the evidence, or have you been persuaded by someone else’s opinions?

What is the Difference Between Evidence and Advocacy?

We experience life through the lens of our own personal experiences. As I have mentioned in other posts, as a litigation attorney I often see the world through the lens of a trial lawyer. And so, as I have studied church history, I have tried to distinguish the difference between sources that are evidence, and sources that are advocacy.

In order to understand the difference between evidence and advocacy, let’s consider a simple car accident case. Assume there are two drivers in different cars who are involved in an accident in an intersection. The plaintiff files a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting that the plaintiff had a green light and the defendant ran the red light, thereby causing the accident. At the trial, the plaintiff will testify that she had a green light. The defendant will have an opposing viewpoint, testifying that it was he, and not the plaintiff, who had the green light. If we assume those two people were the only people present, their two testimonies will be the only evidence.

Those two parties will have attorneys. It is the job of the attorneys to advocate their clients’ positions. They do that by interpreting the evidence in a way that favors their client. But the attorneys weren’t there, so they don’t contribute any evidence. The only two people who were present at the accident are the only two people who can provide the evidence.

So, the judge or jury will have to decide who they will believe. There is no way (under the circumstances presented in this hypothetical) that the judge or jury can know what really happened. All they can do is listen to the evidence then decide how they will interpret that evidence. They are not deciding what happened. They have to decide who they will believe, based on the evidence.

So what does any of this have to do with the First Vision? I think that it’s important to distinguish between the evidence pertaining to the First Vision, and the opinions of those who have considered the evidence and are advocating a certain position.

I Am An Advocate

I believe Joseph Smith. I believe he saw what he said he saw. The purpose of this website is to explain my journey, but also to advocate my position. I want to present the evidence and reference the original sources where the evidence can be found, but as a believer I have a personal bias. If you are reading my blog, I want you to understand that. I admit, I would like to sway you and influence your decision. But I also believe that you shouldn’t take my word for it. There are many who oppose Joseph Smith, and I don’t think you should take their word for it either. You should consider the evidence yourself and come to your own conclusion. Don’t just rely on advocates for your information, because all advocates have an interpretation bias.

What is the Evidence I Have Considered?

I have written, and will write, other posts discussing the original sources. I believe those sources to be information regarding the background of life in up-state New York in the early 1800s, including an understanding of the Second Great Awakening and the role of the itinerant preacher. It includes an understanding of Joseph Smith’s family and their opinions on religion. It includes understanding Joseph’s upbringing, his education (or lack thereof), and his daily life. The evidence includes Joseph Smith’s testimony regarding his experience, which is contained in the four accounts that were written or dictated by Joseph.

What is Not Evidence?

There are a lot of people who write about the First Vision. This website, and my opinions, are not evidence. I have considered the evidence for myself, and I interpret it in a certain way. I believe, and I want other people to believe, so I am advocating my position.

There are many people who oppose Joseph Smith and are passionate about their positions. They are advocates. They present the evidence with a spin based on their personal bias, just as I am doing on this website. The information presented by opponents of Joseph Smith is not evidence. It is advocacy.

So think about what evidence you consider as you decide whether you will or will not believe Joseph Smith. Will you believe those who support Joseph Smith? Will you believe his opponents? Or will you set aside the opinions of advocates, and consider the evidence for youself to form your own opinions?

I Believe My Personal Experiences Are Also Evidence

As I have sought for truth, I have determined that my own personal experiences can also be evidence upon which I can rely.

In his first general conference as President of the Church, Russell M. Nelson taught that a testimony of Joseph Smith comes through personal revelation:

“You don’t have to wonder about what is true. You do not have to wonder whom you can safely trust. Through personal revelation, you can receive your own witness that the Book of Mormon is the word of God, that Joseph Smith is a prophet, and that this is the Lord’s Church. Regardless of what others may say or do, no one can ever take away a witness borne to your heart and mind about what is true.”¹ The Savior Himself taught that the Holy Ghost will teach us all things.²

Our belief in the First Vision should have its foundation in personal revelation from the Holy Ghost. The historical records can be interpreted in many different ways, but personal revelation is unassailable.³

Because of this added element of personal revelation, there are many additional evidences that have contributed to my belief. I have considered experiences in which I received personal revelation as a teen-ager when listening to sacred music; I have considered personal revelation I received as a college student studying the Book of Mormon; I have considered spiritual experiences I had as a missionary in Chile for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; I have considered sacred knowledge that I gained as a student at the BYU Jerusalem Center from January to June in 1996; I have pondered on revelation I received as a teacher at the Missionary Training Center while I was student at BYU; significantly, I have considered the covenants that I made with my wife when we were married in the temple, and the many spiritual promptings we have received together as a married couple trying to receive revelation for our family.

I believe that personal revelation should play a major part in our study of church history. If we are studying only the First Vision accounts, we are ignoring a significant amount of evidence that can come through personal revelation.

The Book of Mormon as Evidence

A significant piece of evidence is the Book of Mormon. When considering the First Vision Accounts, it is common for opponents to pick apart the various accounts, pointing to inconsistencies, and asserting doubts about the First Vision because of those inconsistencies. But the work of the restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ should be considered as a whole. I would recommend a talk by a former president of the Church, Gordon B. Hinckley. He started by referencing an opponent of Joseph Smith: “I am led to this subject by a letter, which I read only Friday, written by a New York evangelist who with diatribe and hate lashed out against the Prophet Joseph, calling him a wicked imposter, a fraud, a fake, and a deceiver and declaring that he was undertaking a national campaign to prove it.”⁴ Later in his address, President Hinckley talks about some things he sees as evidence of Joseph Smith’s prophet calling:

“I reflected on this amazing Joseph Smith. I cannot expect his detractors, including the writer of the letter I read on Friday, to know of his prophetic calling by the power of the Holy Ghost; but I can raise some questions for him and other critics to deal with before they can dismiss Joseph Smith as a false prophet. I have time for only three of many that might be asked: first, what do you do with the Book of Mormon? second, how do you explain his power to influence strong men to follow him, even unto death? and third, how do you rationalize the fulfillment of his prophecies?

“Here is the Book of Mormon. I hold it in my hand. I read its words. I have read Joseph Smith’s explanation of how it came to be. To the unbelieving it is a story difficult to accept, and critics by the score have worn out their lives writing books intended to refute that story and to offer explanations other than the one given by Joseph Smith. But their critical writing only has the effect of stimulating scholars to dig the deeper, and the more deeply they dig the greater the accumulation of evidence for the validity of the story. . . .

“To return to my first question to the critics: What do you do with the Book of Mormon? It is here to be handled and to be read with prayer and earnest inquiry. All of the work of all of the critics throughout the hundred and fifty years of its presence has lacked credibility in the cold light of fact and has been without effect on those who have prayerfully read the book and received by the power of the Holy Ghost a witness of its truth. If there were no other evidence for the divine mission of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon would stand as an irrefutable witness of that fact. To think that anyone less than one inspired could bring forth a book which should have so profound an effect for good upon others is to imagine that which simply cannot be. The evidence for the truth of the Book of Mormon is found in the lives of the millions, living and gone, who have read it, prayed about it, and received a witness of its truth.”⁵

I consider the Book of Mormon to be additional evidence of Joseph Smith’s calling as a prophet, including the truthfulness of Joseph’s testimony of the First Vision.

What Should You Do?

I would recommend that in conjunction with your study of church history, you prayerfully study the Book of Mormon:

“Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

“And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

“And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”⁵

References

1. Russell M Nelson, “Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives,” Ensign, May 2018, 93-96, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2018/05/sunday-morning-session/revelation-for-the-church-revelation-for-our-lives?lang=eng.
2. John 14:26.
3. Jacob 7:5, “I truly had seen angels, and they had ministered unto me. And also, I had heard the voice of the Lord speaking unto me in very word, from time to time; wherefore, I could not be shaken.”
4. Gordon B. Hinckley, “Joseph Smith: ‘Praise to the Man,'” BYU Speeches, Nov. 4, 1979, https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/gordon-b-hinckley/joseph-smith-praise-man/.
5. Hinckley, “Joseph Smith: ‘Praise to the Man.'”
6. Moroni 10:3-5.