FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Joseph Smith's First Vision/Paul's accounts"
(→{{Subarticles label}}: mod) |
(→{{Subarticles label}}: typo) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
=={{Subarticles label}}== | =={{Subarticles label}}== | ||
{{SummaryItem | {{SummaryItem | ||
| − | |link=Joseph Smith's First Vision/Paul's accounts | + | |link=Joseph Smith's First Vision/Paul's accounts/Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts |
|subject=Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts? | |subject=Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts? | ||
|summary=Joseph Smith left several accounts of his First Vision. None of these accounts is identical with any other. The Bible's accounts of Paul's vision on the road to Damascus appear to be contradictory. Yet, the Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts. While accepting or explaining away these discrepancies, the critics nevertheless refuse to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision. | |summary=Joseph Smith left several accounts of his First Vision. None of these accounts is identical with any other. The Bible's accounts of Paul's vision on the road to Damascus appear to be contradictory. Yet, the Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts. While accepting or explaining away these discrepancies, the critics nevertheless refuse to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision. | ||
Revision as of 14:54, 5 July 2011
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Contents
Questions
==
- Critics accept Paul's vision while rejecting that of Joseph Smith for a variety of reasons.
Sub-articles
==
Do Greek scholars solve the discrepancies in Paul's vision accounts?
Summary: Joseph Smith left several accounts of his First Vision. None of these accounts is identical with any other. The Bible's accounts of Paul's vision on the road to Damascus appear to be contradictory. Yet, the Church's sectarian critics accept Paul's account as true despite the Bible containing apparently frank contradictions in its accounts. While accepting or explaining away these discrepancies, the critics nevertheless refuse to give Joseph Smith the same latitude. Members of the Church have long pointed out that this is a clear double standard, designed to bias the audience against Joseph from the beginning. Perhaps because of the force of this argument, some critics have begun to argue that no contradiction exists between the versions of Paul's vision.Source(s) of the criticism
==Detailed Analysis
==
Richard Lloyd Anderson made the following comparisons.
- Many Christians who comfortably accept Paul’s vision reject Joseph Smith’s. However, they aren’t consistent in their criticisms, for most arguments against Joseph Smith’s first vision would detract from Paul’s Damascus experience with equal force.
- For instance, Joseph Smith’s credibility is attacked because the earliest known description of his vision wasn’t given until a dozen years after it happened. But Paul’s earliest known description of the Damascus appearance, found in 1 Corinthians 9꞉1, was recorded about two dozen years after his experience.
- Critics love to dwell on supposed inconsistencies in Joseph Smith’s spontaneous accounts of his first vision. But people normally give shorter and longer accounts of their own vivid experiences when retelling them more than once. Joseph Smith was cautious about public explanations of his sacred experiences until the Church grew strong and could properly publicize what God had given him. Thus, his most detailed first vision account came after several others—when he began his formal history.
- This, too, parallels Paul’s experience. His most detailed account of the vision on the road to Damascus is the last of several recorded. (See Acts 26:9–20.) And this is the only known instance in which he related the detail about the glorified Savior prophesying Paul’s work among the Gentiles. (See Acts 26:16–18.) Why would Paul include this previously unmentioned detail only on that occasion? Probably because he was speaking to a Gentile audience, rather than to a group of Jewish Christians. Both Paul and Joseph Smith had reasons for delaying full details of their visions until the proper time and place.[1]