Joseph Smith struggled to write his earliest autobiography.[1] He described the experience in terms of constraint: confined to a “little narrow prison” of “paper pen and ink” and communicating through “a crooked broken scattered and imperfect language.”[2] He felt inadequate to capture “his marvilous experience” with all God’s “mighty acts” in the dawning years of “the rise of the church of Christ.”[3] Among these mighty acts, of course, was the First Vision, which he hesitated to record until around the summer of 1832, more than twelve years since the vision’s occurrence.

In those days Joseph often retreated to a “secluded” and quiet “grove” to seek God in “meaditation and praiyr.”[4] It wasn’t the first time, of course. Some twelve years earlier, Joseph “retired into the woods . . . amidst all [his] anxieties . . . to pray vocally” for wisdom and relief from his spiritual distress, being confused over religious matters.[5] But in June 1832, in a “Second Sacred Grove,”[6] Joseph prayed about his spiritual distress, confessing “all the past moments of [his] life” that haunted him, thrusting him into “tears of sorrow for [his] folly.”[7]

In a letter to his wife, Emma, Joseph struggled to put his soul’s anguish into words, so he relied heavily on the Bible to aid him. Joseph was raised in a Bible-studying home immersed in a national Bible culture,[8] and “virtually all aspects of his career involved the Bible.”[9] His journals, letters, newspaper articles, sermons, and revelations cite Bible texts and illustrations more frequently than they cite the Book of Mormon. And he would soon finish editing the New Testament after spending two years revising the Bible.[10] So it’s not surprising that scholars have discerned a few allusions to the Bible in his letter to Emma.[11] Add to these several more possibilities.[12] Is it any further surprise to learn that when Joseph recorded his earliest known account of the First Vision that summer, he did so by his own “pen and ink” but not strictly in his own “imperfect language”?

The 1832 account is filled with quotes, allusions, and echoes from across the whole Bible, ranging from the Torah to the book of Revelation.[13] It was Joseph’s account, but he looked to the Bible to describe it, marshaling specific biblical content to craft a mosaic of his experience, not as plagiarism but as biblically stimulated composition. If Joseph eventually “found his own prophetic voice through” the King James Bible, is it any wonder he relied on it to shape the narration of his prophetic calling?[14]

Methodology

To demonstrate this point, I examined the intertextual relationship between the 1832 account of Joseph’s visionary experience and the King James Bible in an effort to discover as many connections as possible between the two texts.[15] Intertextuality is a literary conversation between different texts as one work interacts with the ideas or stories from another. I categorized these potential interactions into citations, allusions, and echoes. A citation is an explicit, word-for-word quotation (or nearly so) from the Bible. An allusion is a deliberate rhetorical reimagining of an earlier text by a later author that is recognizable to the readers, prompting certain ideas about the current context. Allusions are more subtle than citations, sometimes playing with biblical language or riffing off a Bible text. And although short and faint, an echo is still important because it makes us wonder whether a connection is intended. Here are examples of each:

Citation: “none doeth good, no, not one” [cit. Romans 3:12; cf. Psalms 14:1–3; 53:1­–3]

Allusion: “a piller of light above the brightness of the sun at noon day” [all. Acts 22:6; 26:13]

Echo: “I was crucified for the world” [ech. 1 John 2:2]

I discerned biblical content by asking the following seven questions of the texts.[16] Verses and passages were considered possible connections only if they met the criteria created by these questions.

1. Availability. Was the alleged source of the citation, allusion, or echo available to Joseph Smith and his original readers?
2. Volume. How unique or prominent is the text in the Bible?
3. Recurrence. Does Joseph elsewhere return to the same biblical passage?
4. Thematic Coherence. How well does the alleged connection align with the overall message Joseph is developing? Does his text relate to the citation, allusion, or echo? What is the Old Testament or New Testament context from which the citation, allusion, or echo is drawn?
5. Historical Plausibility. Could Joseph have meant to make the connection, and could his readers have understood it?
6. Satisfaction. Does the proposed reading make sense with or without confirmation from the other criteria listed here? Does the intertextual relation satisfy Joseph’s contemporaries by offering a good account of his message when read by competent readers?
7. End Goal. Is Joseph’s appeal to the citation, allusion, or echo in keeping with his apparent primary reason for writing, that is, telling his forgiveness-commission story as a latter-day prophet-apostle?

Because this exegesis is “a modest imaginative craft, not an exact science,”[17] I leave it for readers to decide whether the proposed connections exist. At a minimum, I hope to demonstrate the Bible is not merely present in the 1832 First Vision account, but that it frames, forms, and illuminates the account too. To what degree and why that might be the case, of course, are open questions I will address briefly in the conclusion. Before delving into this analysis, however, I will provide a concise introduction to the 1832 account to situate it in its historical context.

Historical Introduction to the 1832 First Vision Account

The 1832 First Vision account, penned personally by Joseph Smith, is the only known firsthand record of the formative spiritual event in his early life. Smith wrote this account around summer 1832, but it remained largely unseen until 1965 when BYU graduate student Paul Cheesman included it in his master’s thesis appendix.[18]

Joseph prefaced this account with a brief autobiography focused on his spiritual state. He recalled being raised by “goodly Parents who spared no pains to instructing me in the christian religion,”[19] and he believed the Bible “contained the word of God.”[20] Joseph said he was a Christian, implying the First Vision was less a conversionary experience than a confessional one, a moment of true repentance. Indeed, Joseph recalled that at a young age his mind had “become seriously imprest” concerning “the wellfare of [his] immortal Soul.”[21] Consequently, he sought encouragement in the “differant denominations” of Christianity but found none.[22] They were, to his mind, all misaligned from the scriptures, adrift in darkness, and suffering from the same state of confusion and turmoil that troubled him. Joseph was lost, but he refused to blame his family or his faith. Instead, he confessed, “I felt to mourn for my own sins and for the sins of the world.”[23] He looked to the Bible for salvation.

From the Bible, Joseph learned about God’s consistency—that he is “the same yesterday to day and forever” (see Hebrews 13:8).[24] He also read about God’s impartiality as “no respecter to persons” (see Acts 10:34; Deuteronomy 10:17; 2 Chronicles 19:7).[25] And after contemplating the incredible grandeur and beauty of creation, Joseph determined that only the “fool” denies God’s existence (see Psalms 14:1; 53:1).[26] So, he reasoned, if there is a consistently impartial and powerful God “who was and is and will be”[27] (see Revelation 1:8), what mattered most was seeking him “in spirit and in truth”[28] (see John 4:24 ). Thus, Joseph penitently mourned in prayer for himself and the world. What followed, he said, would alter the course of his life forever.

The 1832 First Vision Account Annotated

therefore I cried unto the Lord for mercy [all. Psalm 107:6, 13] for there was none else [all. Deuteronomy 4:35; Isaiah 45:5–6, 22; Joel 2:27] to whom I could go and to obtain mercy [all. Hebrews 4:16] and the Lord heard my cry in the wilderness and while in <the> attitude of calling upon the Lord <in the 16th year of my age>^a a piller of fire^b light [all. Exodus 13:21–22] above the brightness of the sun at noon day [all. Acts 22:6; 26:13] come down from above and rested upon me and I was filled with the spirit of god and the <Lord> opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord [all. Isaiah 6:1; Ezekiel 1:1] and he spake unto me saying Joseph [all. Exodus 3:4; 1 Samuel 3:4, 10; Acts 9:4] <my son> thy sins are forgiven thee [cit. Matthew 9:2; Mark 2:5]. go thy <way> [cit. Luke 17:19] walk in my statutes and keep my commandments [cit. Leviticus 26:3] behold I am the Lord of glory [all. 1 Corinthians 2:8; James 2:1] I was crucifyed for the world [ech. 1 John 2:2] that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life [all. 1 John 5:13] <behold> the world lieth in sin and at this time [all. 1 John 5:19] and none doeth good no not one [cit. Romans 3:12; cf. Psalms 14:1–3; 53:1­–3] they have turned asside from the gospel and keep not <my> commandments they draw near to me with their lips while their hearts are far from me [cit. Matthew 15:8; cf. Isaiah 29:13] and mine anger is kindling [ech. Deuteronomy 32:22] against the inhabitants of the earth to visit them acording to thir ungodliness and to bring to pass [all. Genesis 50:20; Isaiah 28:21] that which <hath> been spoken by the mouth of the prophets and Ap[o]stles [all. Acts 3:21; 2 Peter 3:2; Jude 1:17] behold and lo I come quickly [cit. Revelation 22:12] as it [is] written of me [all. Hebrews 10:7] in the cloud [all. Matthew 24:30] <clothed> in the glory of my Father [all. Matthew 16:27]^†

a Inserted by Frederick G. Williams

b Struck out by Joseph Smith

† JSP, H1:12–13

Commentary

What follows is brief commentary on the intertextuality between the 1832 First Vision account and the King James Bible.

"therefore I cried unto the Lord for Mercy"

The word therefore marks the transition from Joseph’s introductory remarks to his description of the vision, which begins with a plea to God. “I cried unto the Lord,” wrote Joseph, as so many had before him, offering readers numerous possibilities for intertextual allusions.[29] Among those with strong thematic coherence is Psalm 107, where the phrase is repeated twice. Just as Joseph “cried unto the Lord”[30] in his “excedingly distressed”[31] state, so too had God’s people “cried unto the Lord in their trouble” to be saved from “their distresses” (Psalm 107:6, 13), not merely from physical harm, which is the immediate context, but also from the turmoil of a soul disturbed by sin.[32] Moreover, Joseph cried out “for mercy” from God, joining a chorus of pleas by psalmists and blind men for the same (see Psalm 27:7; Matthew 9:27; Mark 10:47).

“for there was none else . . . obtain mercy”

To whom else could he cry out? “There was none else to whom I could go,” wrote Joseph, echoing God’s repeated claim that he alone is God and “none else.” This phrase is used in the King James Bible nearly exclusively to describe the absolute uniqueness of God, most notably in Isaiah 45, where “none else” appears five times (Isaiah 45:5, 6, 14, 18, 22) and ends with an invitation to “be ye saved” by God alone, for “there is none else” who saves (Isaiah 45:22).[33] No other gods nor priests can save. And as Joseph described his predicament, there was “no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the new testament.”[34] He felt a direct appeal to God and “none else” was his only option. So in his desire to “obtain mercy,” he responded to the New Testament invitation to “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy” (Hebrews 4:16).[35]

In this prelude to his vision, Joseph described the spiritual desperation he shared with former-day saints, who also cried heavenward for rescue. But would God respond?

“a piller of fire light above the brightness of the sun”

Joseph using language like that of the ancient Hebrews, confirmed that “the Lord heard my cry” (see Psalm 40:1) “in the wilderness,” the same kind of environment where God anciently heard his people’s voice “that crieth in the wilderness” (Isaiah 40:3). Then, in the wilderness of spiritual confusion, Joseph found himself guided by “a piller of fire,” a strong allusion to the Exodus. Israel followed God out of Egypt toward the promised land through dark wilderness, guided by “a pillar of fire, to give them light” (Exodus 13:21). But Joseph’s experience was not exactly like Israel’s story, which is perhaps why he replaced the phrase “piller of fire” with “piller of light.” This edit is significant because it evokes the Apostle Paul’s conversion (Acts 9:1–8; 22:6–10; 26:13–18). Joseph added how the light was “above the brightness of the sun at noon day,” a strong allusion to Paul’s Christophany, which occurred “about noon” (22:6). Paul described this event to King Agrippa in more detail, saying it occurred “at midday” when he saw “a light from heaven” so bright that it shone “above the brightness of the sun” (26:13).

Which was it, though—a “piller of fire” or a “piller of light”? Both descriptions seem to have been on Joseph’s mind. He oscillated between describing the pillar as “fire” (or “flame”)[36] and “light”[37] in later accounts, although light is canonical and most familiar to readers today. Yet even though Joseph substituted light for fire in the 1832 account, he left piller intact, combining Old Testament and New Testament themes. The fire Israel followed was pillared, while the light at Paul’s conversion was above the brightness of the midday sun. Perhaps this blend of fire and light from the wilderness of Sinai and the road to Damascus was intentional. If so, then maybe Joseph wanted his readers to consider how God led him out of bondage from a spiritual Egypt and guided him through the dark wilderness of confusion, not as a nation like Israel but like Paul as a called messenger, and not by way of human selection but through divine appointment.

“I saw the Lord”

Joseph then described how the light came “down from above and rested upon me and I was filled with the spirit of god,” a faint echo of the way Old Testament prophets were called. “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,” wrote Isaiah, which enabled him to preach and proclaim God’s message (Isaiah 61:1; see Luke 4:16–21). “And the Lord opened the heavens upon me,” Joseph continued, an allusion to Ezekiel who stood “by the river of Chebar, [when] the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God” (Ezekiel 1:1). Then the remarkable happened. Joseph reported, “I saw the Lord,” joining a privileged handful of prophets, like Isaiah, who “saw also the Lord” (Isaiah 6:1). Such visions in the Bible often precede a calling to become a prophetic messenger, which is precisely where Joseph takes the reader next.

“he spake unto me saying Joseph”

Joseph explained how the Lord “spake unto me saying Joseph,” a minor detail with major importance. When the prophet Moses was first called, God spoke his name, “Moses, Moses” (Exodus 3:4). When Samuel received the prophet’s call, God began, “Samuel, Samuel” (1 Samuel 3:4, 10). Paul’s conversionary calling to become an apostle started this way: “Saul, Saul” (Acts 9:4). By following this pattern, Joseph ranked himself among ancient prophets and apostles. He invited readers to consider that the heavens, once thought to be closed, had been reopened. Once supposed to have retired from the earth, God was again calling prophets and apostles.

But what was heaven’s message through its newest prophet-apostle? The first and most precious to Joseph was his sonship with God enabled by forgiveness.

“<my son> thy sins are forgiven thee”

“My son,” heard Joseph, “thy sins are forgiven thee.” These are the very same words the paralytic in the synoptic Gospels heard from Christ before being healed. “Son,” Jesus said to the man, “thy sins be forgiven thee” (Matthew 9:2; see Mark 2:5).[38] While Joseph was not physically paralyzed, he felt so in his spirit, unable to find company with Christians who kept “a holy walk.”[39] Consequently, he said, “I felt to mourn for my own sins.”[40] So having been healed from his spiritual paralysis, Joseph was instructed to “go thy way,” just as the healed paralytic was told: “Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole” (Luke 17:19).[41] And with Joseph’s sins pardoned, God commanded him to “walk in my statutes and keep my commandments,” with an implied promise of blessing, just as he had promised blessings over Israel if they would “walk in my statutes, and keep my commandments, and do them” (Leviticus 26:3).

Through Bible language, Joseph expressed to his readers that they were witnessing the making of a latter-day prophet-apostle who cried out in spiritual darkness and was forgiven of his sins, filled with the spirit of God, and offered a renewed life of holiness. But for what reason?

“behold I am the Lord of glory”

“Behold,” the vision continued, “I am the Lord of glory I was crucifyed for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life.” Thus, Joseph’s stated mission, like that of the apostles in the ancient Church, was to foster faith in the crucified and resurrected Christ, enabling people to attain eternal life.

The phrase “Lord of glory” appears in the Bible only twice, in two New Testament letters (1 Corinthians 2:8; James 2:1) that help shed light on who spoke to Joseph in the vision. Taken together, these verses identify the “Lord of glory” as the “Lord Jesus Christ” (James 2:1), the one “crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:8). Joseph makes this point explicit by recording Christ’s words: “I was crucifyed for the world,” a potential, albeit faint, echo of Johannine teaching (John 1:29; 3:17; 1 John 2:2). Joseph’s use of Johannine writings becomes sharper when he alludes to Christ’s promise “unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life” (1 John 5:13).

But a time was coming when such an invitation would cease to extend from heaven—namely, when the earth would face divine wrath, just as the prophets and apostles had warned.

“behold the world lieth in sin”

Here the vision takes an apocalyptic turn.[42] Joseph was called by name and appointed to announce divine forewarning in the latter days. He was first told about the darkened state of humanity, how the “world lieth in wickedness,” another allusion to the Johannine epistles (see 1 John 5:19). The vision underscored humanity’s fallen state by adding that “at this time . . . none doeth good no not one,” the latter part a direct quotation of Romans 3:12, itself a citation from Psalm 14:1, 3 and Psalm 53:1, 3.

“They have turned asside from the gospel,” the vision continued, “and keep not my commandments,” an unfortunately familiar accusation against God’s people who failed to keep his law. In other words, “they draw near to me with their lips,” the vision said, “while their hearts are far from me,” a clear citation of Christ’s words in Matthew 15:8 (see Isaiah 29:13). In Jesus’s day, the religious authorities’ nitpicking over handwashing rituals condemned themselves. In Joseph’s day, it was the quibbling “strife of words and a contest about opinions” from rival Protestant factions that signaled departure from God’s law.[43]

What is the consequence for those who do not keep God’s commandments? Divine anger and judgment, as made clear in the vision’s stark warning: “mine anger is kindling against the inhabitants of the earth.” Here the reader is reminded of lyrics from the Song of Moses (“For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell,” Deuteronomy 32:22) and of other prophets’ warnings to “the inhabitants of the earth” of their future appointment with divine wrath (Isaiah 24:5–6; 26:20–21; Jeremiah 25:28–32). Specifically, the First Vision account warns of God’s intention “to visit them acording to thir ungodliness,” seemingly a reference to the end times “days of visitation” spoken of in Hosea 9:7 (see Isaiah 10:3; 1 Peter 2:12). In this context God’s “visitation” points toward his final judgment of humankind at Christ’s Second Coming (see Doctrine and Covenants 56:1, 16; 124:10).

“bring to pass”

The First Vision account ends in a crescendo of assurance that God will “bring to pass” his divine activity, a surprisingly rare phrase in the Bible. Many things “came to pass,” of course, but only twice is God said to actively “bring to pass” something. In Genesis 50:20, God would “bring to pass” good where people thought evil would reign, and in Isaiah 28:21, God would “bring to pass his strange act” of redemption, which Christians have traditionally interpreted as Christ’s first coming.[44] According to Joseph’s later revelation, it is the “strange act” (Doctrine and Covenants 95:4) of the Second Coming that readers of the First Vision ought to anticipate: the end-times restoration that precedes Christ’s return and millennial reign. For God will “bring to pass” what he already declared (namely, “that which hath been spoken by the mouth of the prophets”), just as Peter announced that “the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets” (Acts 3:21), were approaching. The prophets were not alone in carrying this message, said Joseph. The apostles, too, spoke of the same thing, as 2 Peter 3:2 and Jude 1:17 remind us.

As the newest prophet-apostle, Joseph had little time to waste.

“behold and lo”

“Beholdand lo I come quickly,” the postlude began, hearkening back to Christ’s same pronouncement some eighteen centuries earlier, a handful of times in the book of Revelation (see 2:5, 16; 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20). “As it is written of me,” the vision continued, repeating words of the book of Hebrews: “Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, O God” (Hebrews 10:7; see Psalm 40:7).

Christ will come “in the clouds,” just as he prophesied in the synoptics, “coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matthew 24:30; see Daniel 7:13; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27). And he will be “clothed in the glory of my Father,” a reaffirmation of the Evangelists’ eschatological hope for Christ’s Second Advent “in the glory of his Father” (Matthew 16:27; see Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26).

The vision ended as Joseph “pondered these things in my heart,” he said, just as Mary did after hearing the shepherds’ report of the angelic pronouncement of her firstborn son (see Luke 2:19).[45]

Conclusion

Biblical content saturates the 1832 First Vision account. In fact, nonbiblical content is practically absent from the text, with two exceptions. The first is a comment by Joseph that he was prayerfully “in the attitude of calling upon the Lord,”[46] and the second is an insertion noting his approximate age at the time of the vision.[47] Moreover, Joseph’s language finds parallels in a wide array of literary genres in the Bible (see below).

Biblical Genre Representation in the 1832 First Vision Account

This apparent intertextuality leads us to ask why so many connections exist. There are many possibilities, all plotted along a spectrum that ranges from skeptical explanations to more faithful ones for Latter-day Saints. A critical eye might see this as evidence that Joseph plagiarized the Bible to spin a tall tale, leveraging his high biblical literacy as a means to an end. Perhaps Joseph’s mind was so steeped in biblical language that, whether consciously or not, he naturally expressed his experience in the religious vernacular of his day.[48] A faithful Latter-day Saint interpretation may view the intertextuality as a sign of Joseph’s authenticity, reasoning that only God’s inspiration could move a pen to write such a biblically saturated work. Addressing these possibilities is well beyond the scope of this chapter. I hope that future research will take up these questions. For now, I will end with a few reflections.

The 1832 First Vision account is often underestimated in terms of its sophistication. Modern reception of Joseph’s “strange” account is typically preoccupied by debate over its factual accuracy of historical events, its strangeness owing to various discrepancies between it and more official versions.[49] Those questions are doubtlessly important, but perhaps the 1832 account’s strangeness is, ironically, due to its familiarity. It is strange because it tells a private story utilizing the language of (and adjacent to) a very public text, the Bible. It’s not necessarily true the 1832 version is “a simple, unpolished account” when viewed through the lens of Joseph’s sophisticated incorporation of biblical language, texts, and symbols into his text.[50]

Relatedly, this research may help explain why the 1832 First Vision account is so unique from the later versions. As some argue, is it the case that the earliest version is an embryonic form of a story that was later embellished or elaborated?[51] Or could it be that Joseph intentionally used biblical content because it established meaning, which he believed could contextually translate his vision to his intended audience, those with sufficient biblical literacy to see the allusions and hear the echoes? If so, then perhaps the earliest account is a tailored version of the First Vision written for curious or skeptical Protestants—for example, cessationist Methodist ministers, like the one who expressed “great contempt” at Joseph’s story.[52] This point helps to explain the 1832 account’s distinct nature when compared to later versions.[53] The other accounts of the First Vision are addressed to different audiences for different reasons.[54]

Moreover, it’s not necessarily true the 1832 account expressed “no indication that Joseph can expect a prophetic calling.”[55] Joseph wrote the earliest First Vision account to Bible-believing Protestants to convince them of his prophetic calling in ways they would recognize and respect.[56] He thus placed the 1832 account into the discursive space of the early Restoration as a scripturalized statement of authority for an audience who could make the Bible connections with him. The earliest account is indexical, a cross-reference guide linking the vision to supporting Bible texts. Readers are meant to pause at each reference to search the scriptures with Joseph and, like the ancient Bereans, discern “whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11).[57] It’s written in such a way that “whoso readeth, let him understand” (Matthew 24:15; see Mark 13:14).

This being the case, why did Joseph choose not to publish it? Perhaps the answer is simple: the 1832 account was the prologue to an abandoned history project never published while he was alive. Had the history been published, perhaps it would have included the account. It could also be that “subsequent experiences made this memory unsatisfying” to Joseph.[58] As he grew in his prophetic role, so did his interpretation of the First Vision. By 1835, when he recorded a second version of the account, his earliest version may have no longer communicated what he meant to express. And perhaps, for whatever reason, he no longer found it necessary to accommodate Bible-oriented Protestants when telling his story. I favor this explanation, especially since Joseph relied less on biblical language when he wrote every First Vision account that followed 1832. As Joseph’s personal prophetic voice matured, he found it less necessary to rely on those who came before him. After all, if the Apostle Paul described his theophany in his own words (Acts 22:6–11; 26:12–18; Galatians 1:13–16), perhaps Joseph wondered why the same should not be true for him.

Whatever the case may be, it’s clear that in “searching the scriptures” of “that sacred depository”[59] for answers to his theological questions, Joseph also found language to explain his visionary experience, specifically his forgiveness of sins and divine calling to become a latter-day prophet-apostle who would restore his faith and the faith universal.[60] Joseph described to Protestants his confession and calling in ways that reminded them of the experiences and messages of biblical prophets and apostles.

Notes

[1] Karen Lynn Davidson et al., eds., Histories, Volume 1: Joseph Smith Histories, 1832–1844, vol. 1 of the Histories series of The Joseph Smith Papers, ed. Dean C. Jessee, Ronald K. Esplin, and Richard Lyman Bushman (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2012), 10–16; hereafter JSP, H1. See also Matthew C. Godfrey et al., eds., Documents, Volume 2: July 1831–January 1833, vol. 2 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, ed. Dean C. Jessee et al. (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2013), 279–85; hereafter JSP,D2.

[2] JSP, D2:320. Historian Steven C. Harper also applied this quote to the 1832 account in his Joseph Smith’s First Vision: A Guide to the Historical Accounts (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2012), 33.

[3] JSP, H1:10.

[4] JSP, D2:249.

[5] JSP, H1:213.

[6] Matthew C. Godfrey, “The Second Sacred Grove: The Influence of Greenville, Indiana, on Joseph Smith’s 1832 First Vision Account,” Journal of Mormon History 44, no. 4 (October 2018): 1–18.

[7] JSP, D2:249.

[8] See Mark A. Noll, America’s Book: The Rise and Decline of a Bible Civilization, 1794–1911 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2022); and Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005), 8–29.

[9] Kent P. Jackson, “Joseph Smith and the Bible,” Scottish Journal of Theology 63, no. 1 (2010): 24.

[10] Smith began his revisions of the Bible in June 1830 and completed the New Testament by late July 1832. The whole work was likely completed in July 1833. Scott H. Faulring, Kent P. Jackson, and Robert J. Matthews, eds., Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2004), 3–6.

[11] JSP, D2:251. The allusions are “he Sendeth forth the Comferter unto as many as believe and humbleeth themselves before him” (see John 14:26; 15:26), “I Count not my life dear to me” (see Acts 20:24), and “the voice of him who is altogether Lovely” (see Song of Solomon 5:16).

[12] For example, “the will of the Lord be done” (see Matthew 6:10; 26:39; see also Luke 22:42), “God is my friend” (see James 2:23), “in him shall I find comfort” (see 2 Corinthians 1:4; 7:6), and “I desire to be with Christ” (see Philippians 1:23).

[13] I am not the first to notice the biblical content Joseph used in the 1832 First Vision account. Other researchers have taken note of many (but not all) of the biblical references, yet without offering detailed analysis. To my knowledge, I am the first researcher to lay out the intertextual content systematically with relevant commentary on the text.

[14] Thomas Wayment, “The King James Version and Modern Translations of the Bible,” in The Bible and the Latter-day Saint Tradition, ed. Taylor G. Petrey, Cory Crawford, and Eric A. Eliason (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2023), 35.

[15] All quotations from the King James Bible are taken from the 1828 Cooperstown edition annotated by Joseph.

[16] These seven questions are a compilation and adaptation of similar questions asked of the New Testament’s use of the Hebrew Bible by biblical scholars Richard B. Hayes, G. K. Beale, D. A. Carson, and Christopher A. Beetham. Richard B. Hayes, Echoes of the Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989), 29–32; G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), xxiv–xxvi; and Christopher A. Beetham, Echoes of Scripture in the Letter of Paul to the Colossians (Boston: Brill, 2008), 28–32.

[17] Hayes, Echoes of the Scripture, 29.

[18] For a brief historical introduction to the 1832 history, see JSP, H1:4­–10.

[19] JSP, H1:11.

[20] JSP, H1:11.

[21] JSP, H1:11.

[22] JSP, H1:11.

[23] JSP, H1:12.

[24] JSP, H1:12.

[25] JSP, H1:12.

[26] Immediately after confessing God’s consistency and impartiality, Joseph burst into prose of wonder as he marveled at the Creator’s cosmos: the sun, moon, and stars blanketing the earth filled with diverse life, a beauty that demands one’s recognition of “power and intiligence in governing the things which are so exceding great and marvilous”( JSP, H1:12). The praise may seem arbitrarily placed as a preface to the First Vision, but Joseph seems to echo Psalm 19:1–6 when pointing to the created order as evidence for God’s power and glory. In doing so, Joseph set the stage for his visionary experience when he received special revelation, or “the testimony of the Lord” (Psalm 19:7). If readers agreed with Joseph that general revelation proved God’s existence, then it was only a short leap for Joseph to argue that special revelation was possible, even in contemporary times.

[27] JSP, H1:12.

[28] JSP, H1:12.

[29] See Exodus 8:12; 14:10, 15; 15:25; 17:4; Numbers 12:13; 20:16; Deuteronomy 26:7; Joshua 24:7; Judges 4:3; Psalm 107:6, 28; Isaiah 19:20. All these references are related to “crying out” (ṣā‘aq) to God, which “is most often a plea for help on the part of the innocent and the victim” (Patrick D. Miller, They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994], 44). This exact phrase is also found in 1 Nephi 2:18; 17:7; Alma 15:10; 43:50; Ether 2:18; and the derivative “cry unto the Lord” is found in in 1 Nephi 2:16; 2 Nephi 4:30; Mosiah 23:28; Alma 18:41; 34:27; 37:30; Helaman 11:3; 3 Nephi 3:15; Mormon 8:27; Ether 1:37; 9:34.

[30] JSP, H1:12.

[31] JSP, H1:11.

[32] Commentators notice how Psalm 107 tells of “four situations of human need that elicit a cry or prayer to God,” in which “God has made a swift answer” to their prayers for rescue, two of which—imprisoned sinners and lost vagrants—fit Joseph’s self-description as a young man “convicted” and “searching” (JSP, H1:11; Miller, They Cried to the Lord, 182). These four categories are lost vagrants (Psalm 107:4–9), prisoners who had “rebelled against the words of God” (Psalm 107:10–16), recently healed people (Psalm 107:17–22), and seafarers (Psalm 107:23–33) (Allen P. Ross, A Commentary on The Psalms, vol. 3, 90–150 [Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2016], 299).

[33] See Deuteronomy 4:35, 39; 1 Kings 8:60; Isaiah 45:5, 6, 14, 18, 22; 46:9; Joel 2:27. The two exceptions, Isaiah 47:8, 10, are used to chastise the arrogant Chaldeans who likened their rule to the throne of God.

[34] JSP, H1:11–12.

[35] The phrase “obtain mercy” also appears in Hosea 2:23; Matthew 5:7; Romans 11:30–31; 1 Corinthians 7:25; 1 Timothy 1:13, 16; 1 Peter 2:10.

[36] JSP, J1:88.

[37] JSP, H1:215.

[38] See also Matthew 9:2; Luke 5:20.

[39] JSP, H1:11; emphasis added.

[40] JSP, H1:12; emphasis added.

[41] Relatedly, in Mosiah 27:16, Alma the Younger is instructed to “go thy way” in a manner reminiscent of Paul’s conversion, and later Christ commands his followers to “go thy way” (3 Nephi 12:24). See also Jacob 5:12 and Alma 42:31. The command is seemingly inverted in the Wentworth account when Joseph was “expressly commanded to ‘go not after them,’” that is, religious denominations. JSP,H1:494.

[42] Joseph completed his revision of the book of Revelation around the same time he penned the 1832 First Vision account, between July 20 and 31, 1832. Faulring, Jackson, and Matthews, Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible, 57.

[43] JSP, H1:208.

[44] For example, Gregory the Great (Pope Gregory I) reasoned that Isaiah was “contemplating our salvation and [Christ’s] passion” when he described Christ’s first coming as “a strange act.” The act is “strange” because while God’s redemptive work is to “gather the souls that he created and call them back to the joys of the eternal light,” we would not expect it to come by flogging and crucifixion. God’s work is “strange” to us, but not to him. When Christ accomplished his “strange act,” he was enabled to do his “proper work” of leading “his creatures to the glory of his fortitude in which he lives and reigns with God.” Steven A. McKinion, ed., Old Testament: Isaiah 1–39, vol. 10 of Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, ed. Thomas C. Oden (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004), 196.

[45] JSP, H1:13; fn. 48.

[46] While “calling upon the Lord” is common in the King James Bible, the word attitude does not appear at all. The phrase “attitude of prayer” was common in Joseph’s day.

[47] The phrase “in the 16th year of my age” was inserted by Frederick G. Williams, who was appointed Joseph’s scribe on July 20, 1832, around when the earliest First Vision account was written. Williams said he was “constantly in [Joseph] Smiths employ” at that time (Frederick G. Williams statement, n.d., Financial papers and statements, 1837–1842, Frederick G. Williams Papers, 1834–1842, Church History Library, Salt Lake City, Utah). Williams was also called to serve as a counselor to Joseph and would go on to publish the first edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, the first Latter-day Saint hymnal, and the newspaper The Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate (Frederick G. Williams, “Frederick Granger Williams of the First Presidency of the Church,” BYU Studies 12, no. 3 [1972]: 247–48).

[48] As Philip Barlow noted, the 1832 account “not only documents [Joseph’s] concern to search the Bible, but the narrative itself is, in part unconsciously, laced with biblical expressions, revealing how thoroughly the boy’s mind was steeped in the words and rhythms of the Authorized Version” (Philip L. Barlow, “Before Mormonism: Joseph Smith’s Use of the Bible, 1820–1829,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 57, no. 4 [1989]: 746). Barlow elsewhere argued that Joseph’s “use of the Bible, like the Mormon movement as a whole, drew heavily from the environment in which they took root” (Philip L. Barlow, Mormons and the Bible: The Place of the Latter-day Saints in American Religion [New York: Oxford University Press, 2013], 44).

[49] For an introduction to this critical reception, see Steven C. Harper, “Raising the Stakes: How Joseph Smith’s First Vision Became All or Nothing,” BYU Studies 59, no. 2 (2020): 23–58.

[50] JSP, D2:278. Dan Vogel also called the 1832 account “less polished” than later versions (Dan Vogel, Charisma under Pressure: Joseph Smith, American Prophet, 1831–1839 [Salt Lake City: Signature, 2023], 170). Milton Backman similarly called the account “not polished” when compared to later accounts (Milton V. Backman Jr., Joseph Smith’s First Vision: The First Vision in Its Historical Context [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1971], 124).

[51] Fawn McKay Brodie and those who follow her critique maintain that the earliest First Vision account underwent “remarkable evolution,” having been embellished to keep pace with Joseph’s growing persona as a prophet (Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet, 2nd ed. [New York: Vintage, 1995], 24–25). Other scholars reject Brodie’s critical suspicion of Joseph’s revisions, arguing instead that he elaborated his earliest version but not from ill will or deception. Instead, similar to what I have argued, Joseph interpreted his memory of the event according to contextual circumstances as adaptations of “the same script to a different end” (Harper, First Vision, 32).

[52] JSP, H1:216.

[53] Steven Harper also suggested that the literary nature of the 1832 account indicates Joseph “sought consensus with cultural mediators—with the Methodist minister.” Harper, First Vision, 26. Relatedly, historian Ronald Barney theorized that Joseph intended to publish the 1832 account as a counterweight to the negative press he received from critics. The biblical nature of the account strengthens his argument. Ronald O. Barney, Joseph Smith: History, Methods, and Memory (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2020), 133–35.

[54] For example, the 1835 account was written as a recapitulation of Joseph’s conversation with “Joshua the Jewish minister” (JSP, J1:87). The 1842 account was written for a general audience, readers of the Chicago Democrat newspaper, and later revised for He Pasa Ekklesia, an introductory volume to religion in America, published in 1844 (JSP, H1:489–92, 503–6).

[55] Stan Larson, “Another Look at Joseph Smith’s First Vision,” Dialogue 47, no. 2 (2014): 39.

[56] To this end, it is an insufficient view of the 1832 account to deem it as merely a spiritual autobiography that fits neatly into nineteenth-century revivalism. Joseph did not tell his personal conversion story, for he stated he was raised by Christian parents and believed in the Bible—thus he was already converted before entering the grove. Instead, Joseph told his forgiveness-commission story, the genesis of the complete restoration of Christianity. Such a story is unparalleled among conversion testimonies of his day.

[57] A critic might view the 1832 account’s engagement with the Bible as merely a manipulative maneuver to convince faithful Protestant readers of Joseph’s position by using sacred texts familiar to them. Granted, but the opposite argument may be made as well—namely, that Joseph yielded to the Bible when describing his visionary experience, and rather than simply using the text, he was used by it to herald a fresh divine work in the world. The negating power of these opposing arguments hints at the rhetorical power behind the 1832 account.

[58] Harper, First Vision, 27.

[59] JSP, H1:11.

[60] Harper, First Vision, 24.