Skip to content
  • Give me access to SECRET EPISODES
  • Episodes
  • Watch
  • Listen
  • Subscribe
  • Episodes
  • Watch
  • Listen
  • Subscribe
  • Give me access to SECRET EPISODES
PrevPrevious Episode1835 First Vision (Part 5 of 9)
Next ExpisodeHow we got Book of Abraham (part 7 of 9)Next

First Vision Conflicts (Part 6 of 9)

Table of Contents: First Vision Conflicts (Part 6 of 9)

Click to Support
Gospel Tangents

Joseph Smith gave multiple accounts of his First Vision experience.  Some people find the differing accounts problematic, while others don’t think they are a big issue.  We’ll talk about these First Vision conflicts with historian Dan Vogel and discuss the different perspectives.

YouTube player

GT:  For some people, these First Vision conflicts are a big deal and they prove Mormonism isn’t true. And for other people, it’s like, what’s the big deal? Why is this an issue? So I guess my question is, where do you fit in there? I mean, in my mind, would it be inconsistent (and I’m a believer) to say, well, maybe he had something in 1820 or 1821, maybe it was a born again experience. Maybe he didn’t tell everything in that 1832 account, and then in 1838, he’s having these persecutions. Maybe he’s misremembering some things and going to 1824. To me, it’s not it’s not a testimony killer. I’ll put it that way. So number one, where do you fit among those two groups?

Dan:  Okay, so my goal is not to kill people’s testimony. I’m just a historian. This is how to look at the documents in a historically minded way.

GT:  Okay.

Dan:  Historians look for these kinds of things to show development. Now, some of the details you can write off as memory problems. But you can’t use faulty memory like Stephen Harper does, as an apologetic, to explain away contradictions. You might use faulty memory, like there’s false memory syndrome, where people can actually create false memories, trying to remember vague memories, and it works.

Dan:  I mean, an example would be the Spalding witnesses. They have vague memories about a manuscript in the past. We know that what they remembered was wrong. Because they could only remember what they had read in the book of Mormon, and nothing else. We know that the the Book of Mormon is not about the lost 10 tribes. That was a common misconception, but these witnesses that’s gotten into their memory somehow. It’s a vague story, they vaguely remember the names. The memories become sharper, the more they talk to each other. So we know from other methods that they were wrong. Okay. But we don’t use false memory syndrome to prove that they’re wrong. We use that as an explanation of how they got it wrong. Okay.

Dan:  So you can’t come up on Joseph Smith, and say, well, there’s these contradictions, and they can all be explained away by this false memory syndrome theory, or else you can never catch anyone making things up or prevaricating, on whatever issue. They could always say, it’s memory. A lot of politicians try that. But it’s not what historians do. It’s what apologists do.

GT:  Okay.

Dan:  So I’m not trying to kill people’s testimonies. That’s not my concern. I don’t care about that question. Okay. It’s not that I don’t care about your religion or anything. I don’t care about destroying people’s faith or anything. I’m just trying to get it close to what probably really happened as I can. That doesn’t mean that some people of faith can’t hang on to that faith, but it has to maybe evolve a little bit. I’m just trying to find the facts, and what probably the best evidence, the best scenario to explain the evidence. It’s not my job to figure out how people of faith, or to what to do with this. I, I could just point out the problem, and not the answer, maybe. So I think there is a way, there is a way to hang on as long as you want for people in different ways. It’s a very personal thing.

GT:  So you wouldn’t be opposed to somebody that says, Yeah, I think Joseph conflated maybe one or two visions here, conflated 1820 with 1824, and it’s not that big of a deal. Yeah, there’s some contradictions there. But it’s, you know, it’s a faulty memory, big deal.

Dan:  Well, I think he changed it on purpose to teach a lesson. He’s more concerned–he’s a charismatic leader. He’s not a historian. He could care less about history, facts, keeping the revelations pure as they were originally given. He doesn’t care about any of that. He is trying to get things done, motivate people to do things that they wouldn’t do without this motivation.

Check out our conversation….

First Vision Conflicts - First Vision Conflicts (Part 6 of 9) - Mormon History Podcast
Do you think First Vision conflicts are a testimony killer, or are they no big deal?

DOn’t miss our other conversations with Dan!

291 – 1835 Account of First Vision

290 – Making a Case for Melchizedek Priesthood in 1831?

289 – Methodist Visions

288 – Why “Pious Fraud” Ticks off Everyone

287 – Dan Vogel Was a McConkie Mormon!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 32:26 — 29.8MB) | Embed

Subscribe: Email | RSS | More

Love this? Donate or Subscribe

Do you love the friendly, non-bashing interviews about Mormonism here on Gospel Tangents? 
Please show your support for Gospel Tangents by becoming a donor or subscriber:

Make me a Donor
Make me a Subscriber
No related products found.

More Podcasts with these Guests:

  • Phelps Role in Book of Abraham Civil War (Part 7 of 8)
  • Raiders of the Lost Mormon Cave (Part 1 of 6)
  • *Staker Weighs in on First Vision (Part 5 of 5)
  • Did Methodist Minister Scold Young Joseph?
  • Is Book of Mormon anti-Masonic? (Part 3 of 7)

Get more information on the people and things discussed in this episode:

  • Guest: Dan Vogel
  • First Vision, Spalding Conspiracy
  • Historical Mentions Mormon History
  • Tags: GT Podcast, iTunes

Tell me when the next episode drops!

PrevPrevious Episode1835 First Vision (Part 5 of 9)
Next ExpisodeHow we got Book of Abraham (part 7 of 9)Next
  • Date: June 28, 2019
  • Guest: Dan Vogel
  • First Vision, Spalding Conspiracy
  • Historical Mentions Mormon History
  • Tags: GT Podcast, iTunes
  • Posted By: RickB

Subscribe

I passed my class! Please help support Gospel Tangents and subscribe to the podcast!

Rick Bennett, Host

Rick Bennett is the friendly host of Gospel Tangents LDS Podcast: The Best Source for Mormon History, Science, and Theology. Book Rick for your fireside or conference.

More Interviews

  • Ben Spackman
  • David Ostler
  • Denver Snuffer
  • Lachlan McKay
  • Lindsay Hansen Park
  • Margaret Toscano
  • Richard Bushman
  • Sally Gordon
  • Terryl Givens
  • Ugo Perego...
View all 100+ Interviewees

Proud to be an Amazon Associate

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Subscribe

Go ad-free, get written transcripts, and talk to Rick one-on-one!
Stop Seeing Ads

Rick Bennett, Host of Gospel Tangents

Rick Bennett is the friendly, independent historian at the heart of Gospel Tangents LDS Podcast: The Best Source for Mormon History, Science, and Theology. When he isn't interviewing Mormon scholars, prophets, and others, he is teaching math and statistics at Utah Valley University. He also freelances as a research biostatistician in the fields of Dermatology and Traumatic Brian Injuries, as well as in the network television/cable T.V. industries as a sports statistician. Rick holds a Master of Statistics Degree from the University of Utah.

Contact Rick
Book Rick for your Event
Podcast Episodes
0 +
People Interviewed
0 +
  • Home
  • About
  • Episodes
  • Subscribe
  • Fan Shop
  • Book Rick
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • About
  • Episodes
  • Subscribe
  • Fan Shop
  • Book Rick
  • Contact Us
Copyright 2025, Gospel Tangents. All Rights Reserved.