The 1832 account of the First Vision is the earliest version on record. While there are four known published accounts, this is the most unique and the only one written in Joseph Smith’s hand. New research suggests Joseph may have intentionally used biblical phrasing to signal his prophetic calling. In this interview, Kyle Beshears discusses how Joseph’s 1832 efforts to connect with Protestant contemporaries may explain the account’s strange language.
Sign up to be notified when we publish new content, like articles about the Prophet Joseph, N. T. Wright on the New Testament, and Joseph F. Smith.
What makes the 1832 account unique?
The 1832 account is Joseph Smith’s earliest written record of the First Vision and the only one written by his own hand. These facts alone make it unique among the others, which emphasize restoration and Joseph’s role in it. The 1832 account, however, is more personal. Joseph’s spiritual distress is more palpable—his conviction of sin, his desire for forgiveness, and his direct encounter with Christ.
In this version, Joseph describes how he sought God in prayer after struggling to discover a true form of Christianity among the various denominations.
Interestingly, the 1832 account highlights Joseph’s and the world’s sinfulness rather than religious conflict (even though the conflict is present in the preface).
It was never published in his lifetime.
That conviction—Joseph having “felt to mourn for my own sins and for the sins of the world”—fueled his desire for forgiveness. While praying, he describes a divine manifestation: a pillar of fire/light descends, he sees the Lord, is forgiven of his sins, is instructed to walk in Christ’s commandments, and is issued an apocalyptic warning.
What sets this account apart is not its ‘strangeness’ of details or presentation.
Rather, the 1832 account’s biblical intertextuality makes it unique from the others. Nearly every sentence echoes scripture, from the “pillar of light/fire”—a blend of Exodus and Paul’s conversion—to God calling Joseph by name, like he did with Moses, Samuel, and Paul. This suggests Joseph framed his vision within biblical patterns, making it resonate with Bible-literate readers.
And although it was never published in his lifetime, the 1832 account reveals how Joseph originally understood his vision as both a moment of redemption and the beginning of his divine calling.
What interested you about Joseph Smith’s account of the First Vision?
When I first read the 1832 account, it was obvious right away to me that Joseph Smith was either deeply influenced by the Bible or was subconsciously—if not intentionally—drawing on biblical language and motifs to describe his visionary experience. It’s so dense with biblical phrases and themes.
But what surprised me was how this had gone relatively unnoticed by most readers. It’s the ‘strangeness’ that seems to get all the attention about the 1832 account. But what if its ‘strangeness’ is actually because it’s a ‘scripturalized’ account?
I mentioned this idea to some Latter-day Saint friends, and they were intrigued. It wasn’t something they had necessarily considered before. That made me wonder how my proximity to the Bible, as a Protestant pastor who studies and teaches scripture regularly, trained my eyes to see it. And I suspect that’s something I share with my theological ancestors, the kind of people to whom Joseph was speaking: biblically literate Protestants.
That realization fascinated me. Was Joseph deliberately shaping his narrative in a way that would resonate with Protestant readers like me?
Or was he instinctively using the language of scripture because it was so ingrained in him?
Or was it something more complex—perhaps an attempt to validate his experience using a sacred text that his audience already trusted?
These questions drove me to study the account in depth, and the more I examined it, the more I saw how thoroughly the Bible frames, forms, and illuminates Joseph’s telling of his vision.
But first things first—I had to make the argument that the 1832 account was, indeed, a ‘scripturalized’ (not ‘strange’) account. That’s what gave rise to the research.
How did Joseph Smith use Biblical phrases in his 1832 account of the First Vision?
The 1832 account is jam-packed with biblical phrases, allusions, and echoes. Virtually every sentence contains language drawn from the Bible, ranging from direct citations to more subtle references, like echoes.
Joseph used things like biblical vocabulary, structure, and themes to describe his experience, penning a narrative that aligns his vision with scriptural patterns of how God called prophets and apostles. This intertextuality suggests that the Bible wasn’t merely a common touchstone but actually the framework through which Joseph articulated his experience.
Examples of Biblical phrases in the 1832 account of the First Vision
For example:
- “I am the Lord of glory. This phrase very closely resembles 1 Corinthians 2:8, in which the Apostle Paul describes Christ as “the Lord of glory.” The phrase is surprisingly rare in the Bible, and specifically refers to Jesus.
- “In the glory of my Father.” This phrase appears toward the end of the vision. While it isn’t a direct quote, it strongly echoes Matthew 16:27: “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father.”
- “None doeth good, no, not one.” This is a direct citation of Romans 3:12, which is itself a quote from Psalms 14:1–3 and 53:1–3. This is among the clearest biblical references in the 1832 account.
These examples (and over thirty others) show how Joseph Smith wove together biblical material—sometimes subtly, other times explicitly—to form and frame his visionary experience in a language that Bible-literate Protestants would recognize and respect.
What is an intertextual relationship?
Intertextuality refers to how texts interact with each other. “No text exists in a vacuum,” as biblical scholar Danna Fewell put it. All texts are situated in a web of related texts, each dependent on sources that precede them while anticipating new literary works that will employ them.
Intertextuality can occur through citations (like direct quotes), allusions (subtle reworkings of biblical phrases), or echoes (faint references that evoke biblical ideas).
The 1832 account is no exception. Recognizing these intertextual relationships helps us better understand how Joseph Smith used scripture to shape his account and communicate his experience in a way that resonated with his audience.
That said, identifying intertextuality can be somewhat subjective.
Richard Hayes, another biblical scholar, described it as “a modest imaginative craft, not an exact science.” In other words, while some textual relationships are clear, others are more interpretive.
For example, when an author directly quotes a source (like Paul did in Romans 3:12 of Psalms 14:1–3 and 53:1–3), there’s an obvious connection. But when an author borrows phrasing, structure, or motifs, it’s a bit more difficult to discern the intertextuality without careful and sober analysis. But that’s what makes intertextual studies fascinating and a bit of an art, as Hayes said.
Ultimately, just like human relationships can be difficult to define, you know one when you see one. And in the case of the 1832 account of the First Vision, the relationship with the Bible is unmistakably there.
Joseph’s account engages in a literary conversation with scripture, borrowing its language, imagery, and themes to construct his narrative.
What are the differences between citations, allusions, and echoes?
Intertextuality occurs at different levels of intensity, ranging from strong, undeniable connections to subtle, interpretive ones. For the 1832 account of the First Vision, I see at least three primary types: citations, allusions, and echoes, ordered from strongest to weakest (and most likely to least likely).
Citations
A citation is an explicit word-for-word transposition (or nearly so) from the Bible into Joseph Smith’s account. These are the strongest biblical presences in the text, leaving no doubt that the reference is intentional.
For example, when Joseph records that “none doeth good, no, not one,” he is directly quoting Romans 3:12, which itself cites Psalms 14:1–3 and 53:1–3. The biblical language is preserved verbatim, making the intertextual connection clear.
Allusions
An allusion is more subtle. It doesn’t directly quote scripture but instead plays with biblical words or riffs on a familiar passage. Unlike citations, allusions require readers to recognize the parallel.
For instance, Joseph’s phrase “a pillar of light above the brightness of the sun at noon day” strongly recalls Acts 22:6 and 26:13, where Paul describes seeing “a great light … above the brightness of the sun” during his conversion. While not an exact quote, the phrasing and imagery unmistakably evoke Paul’s experience, aligning Joseph’s vision with another biblical theophany.
Echoes
An echo is even fainter. It’s brief, suggestive, and sometimes ambiguous enough to make readers pause and wonder if there’s a connection. It’s like overhearing a familiar tune and turning to a friend to ask, “Did you hear that?”
An example is Joseph’s phrase “I was crucified for the world,” which subtly recalls 1 John 2:2, “He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” While not an obvious citation or structured allusion, the phrasing suggests a connection to John’s theme of Christ’s atoning work.
Each type of intertextual relationship helps frame Joseph’s account within a biblical context, shaping his narrative in a way that Bible-literate readers of his day could recognize and understand.
What are the intertextual references in “a pillar of fire light above the brightness of the sun”?
This one is fascinating. It’s my favorite intertextual connection in the entire 1832 account of the First Vision. In short, I believe Joseph Smith’s description of a “piller of fire <light> above the brightness of the sun” blends two important biblical motifs:
- The first is Exodus 13:21–22, in which the Israelites were led through the wilderness by “a pillar of fire” at night, symbolizing divine guidance and presence.
- The second is Acts 22:6; 26:13, in which Paul’s conversion experience includes a heavenly light that shone “above the brightness of the sun” at midday.
Joseph’s language strongly mirrors this account.
By merging these images, Joseph presents his vision as a “both-and” moment, one of divine transformation (a la Paul) and divine guidance (like Israel).
Allow me the time to tease this out a bit because if it’s true, it’s very fascinating.
Biblical roots of the 1832 accounts of the First Vision
Remember the context of the 1832 account, that Joseph found himself in a spiritual ‘wilderness’ of sorts, one in which he was wandering in religious confusion.
It’s no surprise that Joseph used language to evoke Israel’s wandering in the wilderness. He said, “The Lord heard my cry” (see Psalm 40:1), “in the wilderness” (see Isaiah 40:3). Just as Israel wandered in the desert under divine direction, Joseph found himself in a spiritual wilderness of religious confusion.
And in that wilderness, Joseph describes being guided by a “pillar of fire”, which is an allusion to Exodus 13:21, where Israel was led toward the Promised Land through “a pillar of fire, to give them light.”
Joseph Smith’s alterations
However, Joseph makes a significant change: he swapped out “fire” for “light”, which evokes Paul’s Christophanic conversion in Acts 9:1–8, 22:6–10, and 26:13–18. Paul’s vision also occurred “about noon” (Acts 22:6), and when recounting it to King Agrippa, he described seeing “a light from heaven” that shone “above the brightness of the sun” (Acts 26:13). Joseph’s language strongly mirrors this account.
So, which was it—a “pillar of fire” or a “pillar of light”? I know that some argue Joseph may have just been struggling to describe his experience and nothing more. But notice how he didn’t simply swap one word for another—he preserved “pillar”, rather than replacing it with something like “beam” or “column” of light.
Purposeful blending of imagery
I think that’s intentional because both descriptions (“pillar of fire” and “pillar of light”) were on his mind. That’s why he oscillated between describing the pillar as “fire” (or “flame”) in later accounts, but “light” became the most familiar and canonical version. Even though he substituted “light” for “fire” in 1832, he kept the word “pillar,” combining Old and New Testament themes. The Israelites followed a pillar of fire, while Paul’s conversion involved a light above the brightness of the sun.
So, if this blending of imagery was intentional, then Joseph may have been inviting his readers to see his experience as a sort of exodus—not from physical bondage like Israel’s, but from spiritual confusion. He was not led as a nation, but as an individual, like Paul. And just as Paul was not called by human authority but by divine appointment, Joseph’s vision marked the beginning of a calling that, in his view, came directly from heaven.
Like I said, fascinating (if true).
Are there parallels in the phrase “he spake unto me saying Joseph”?
This is another fascinating one to me, and evidence that the 1832 account of the First Vision was, in fact, Joseph communicating his calling to be a prophet (contra one scholar who argued the 1832 account offers “no indication that Joseph can expect a prophetic calling”).
The phrase “he spake unto me saying Joseph” follows a biblical pattern where God calls individuals by name, often prior to calling them to become a prophet or apostle. For example, God said “Moses, Moses” (see Exodus 3:4), “Samuel, Samuel” (see 1 Samuel 3:4, 10) and “Saul, Saul” (see Acts 9:4).
This pattern isn’t simply a stylistic feature of biblical authors. I think it serves a theological function. In each of these instances, the repeated name signals a sort of divine urgency and summons. It marks an important moment of transition, marking the person’s pivot from their former life into a divinely appointed role.
The 1832 account aligns Joseph’s experience with this biblical precedent.
Interestingly, this naming pattern also appears outside the Bible in adjacent texts. For example, in the pseudepigraphical Acts of Abraham, the patriarch experiences a heavenly manifestation described as “the heavens in a stream of fire” (sound familiar?). Then, a voice calls out, “Abraham, Abraham!”
As a bit of trivia, Joseph is called by name twice in the First Vision presentation at the Church History Museum, even though that’s not recorded in any of the extant versions of the First Vision. I don’t know who wrote that scripture, but they were apparently attuned to this double-naming, whether intentionally or not.
Do you think Joseph Smith received a prophetic calling as outlined in the 1832 account?
As a Protestant, I don’t personally believe Joseph was a prophet—if I did, I’d make for a very poor Protestant and an even poorer Latter-day Saint! However, I am very convinced that the 1832 account of the First Vision is written so that Joseph is clearly receiving a prophetic calling, which runs contrary to the opinion of other researchers.
For example, Stan Larson has argued that the 1832 account expresses “no indication that Joseph can expect a prophetic calling.” I don’t think that’s the best interpretation of what Joseph was doing with the account.
Larson’s opinion fits well with what I call the ‘Big Fish Story’ theory of the 1832 First Vision account—the idea that it was merely an embryonic, smaller-scale conversion story akin to other 19th-century testimonies of salvation that grew over time with each retelling.
But there’s a problem with that theory: Joseph didn’t think he needed conversion. By his own account, it was the Bible and his conviction of sin that led him into the forest in the first place. He was already a Christian in his mind.
While the preface to the 1832 account of the First Vision presents Joseph Smith as spiritually confused and ‘lost’ in a wilderness of religious contention, it never frames him as an unbeliever looking for faith. That’s an important distinction.
True, the later (and more canonical) accounts more explicitly frame the First Vision as a church-restoring commission. However, this earliest version still follows a recognizable pattern of divine calling, especially for people who could ‘pick up’ what Joseph was ‘putting down.’
So, whether Joseph understood it that way at the time or not, the way he structured his account suggests that something beyond a personal conversion moment was taking place.
What are some examples of non-biblical content in the 1832 account?
There’s not much, really. Almost the entire account is constructed using biblical language. There are a couple of minor exceptions:
- Joseph includes a statement about being “in the attitude of calling upon the Lord.” While prayer is obviously described frequently in the Bible, the phrase “attitude of prayer” is more of a contemporary expression. That’s certainly Joseph’s voice.
- There’s an editorial note about Joseph being in his “16th year.” This detail was inserted by his scribe, Frederick G. Williams, and might not actually be true (i.e., Joseph might not have been sixteen years old when it happened).
I think these exceptions highlight just how thoroughly Joseph Smith embedded his experience within a biblical framework.
Is the account’s sophistication underestimated?
The 1832 account is commonly dismissed as an unpolished, simple version of the First Vision. It’s framed as an early, somewhat naive attempt that lacks the clarity and structure of later retellings. But I think this view really underestimates the 1832 account’s literary sophistication and theological depth.
Far from being some kind of ‘rough draft,’ the 1832 account of the First Vision is a carefully composed narrative that speaks in the language of the Bible, skillfully weaving together biblical themes, literary structure, and theological context.
Consider the following points.
1. Deliberate editorial choices
The 1832 account isn’t just sprinkled with biblical phrases; it’s woven together like a biblical tapestry. Joseph’s language draws from multiple scriptural genres, including prophetic commission narratives (like Moses and Paul), historical storytelling (such as the Exodus and Israel’s wilderness journey), and even apocalyptic literature (with imagery that evokes divine glory and judgment).
Nearly every phrase has a biblical parallel, whether a direct citation, an allusion, or an echo. That’s not evidence of a hastily written personal testimony but of someone deliberately shaping their experience within a recognizable scriptural framework.
2. Contemporary audience
Unlike his later versions that would emphasize church restoration and divine authority, the 1832 account of the First Vision seems crafted with a Bible-literate Protestant audience in mind.
Joseph Smith’s language and themes align with the religious concerns of early nineteenth-century revivalists—sin, personal redemption, the need for divine guidance, and the power of prayer. Protestant readers would have certainly recognized the structure of Joseph’s vision as something akin to the conversion narratives of the time, yet with significant differences that elevate it beyond a typical testimony.
I think this suggests a deliberate effort to frame his experience in a way that resonated with his contemporaries.
It isn’t just a scattered recollection—it’s structured.
So, the 1832 account isn’t primitive—it’s quite sophisticated. It isn’t just a scattered recollection—it’s structured. The reason it’s ‘strange’ is owed to its ‘scripturalized’ nature. Joseph may not have spelled it out as directly as he would later, but the framework is undeniably there.
In my opinion, those who fail to see the sophistication of the 1832 account of the First Vision fail to realize what Joseph Smith was doing, whether consciously or unconsciously.
Who do you think was the audience for the 1832 account?
People like me! Certainly, it was primarily intended for Bible-literate Protestants, particularly those skeptical of new revelation or ‘re-opened’ heavens (as it’s sometimes framed).
The 1832 account’s heavy reliance on biblical language suggests an attempt to present the vision in such a way that would resonate with Protestants. Given that Joseph later recalled a Methodist minister rejecting his experience with “great contempt,” this account may have been designed to make his claims more palatable to a Protestant readership.
I also wonder if the 1832 account of the First Vision was meant to be published, but never was, and, if so, whether Joseph was attempting to head off the inevitable negative press that was being built against him at the time.
Recall that Eber D. Howe was collecting affidavits against Joseph around this time for his forthcoming Mormonism Unvailed.
But that’s speculation on my part.
Why are later accounts of the First Vision less biblically saturated?
I think the most plausible explanation is that Joseph Smith’s prophetic voice matured over time. His earliest recounting of the vision, in 1832, is almost entirely steeped in biblical language, as though he felt the need to structure his experience within the framework of scripture to make it more persuasive or even to process it himself.
But as the years went on, Joseph Smith’s way of telling the story changed. Later accounts (1835, 1838, Wentworth Letter) became progressively less reliant on biblical phrasing, and that shift tells us something about his development as a religious leader. Perhaps Joseph thought to himself, “If I’m a prophet-apostle like Samuel and Paul, then why can’t I use my own voice as they did?” In 1832, Joseph was still, in many ways, young in his office.
Joseph’s narrative didn’t just change arbitrarily.
By 1838, however, he was the leader of a rapidly growing religious movement, and his retellings of the First Vision placed more emphasis on divine authority, apostasy, and the need for a restored church. The transition from a biblically saturated telling to a more personal, church-centered one indicates how Joseph’s mission—and his way of articulating it—developed over time.
In other words, Joseph’s narrative didn’t just change arbitrarily. It evolved as he did in his prophetic role, audience, and theological framework.
What began as a deeply biblical story meant to resonate with Protestant readers gradually became a foundational narrative for a new religious identity—one that no longer needed to lean as heavily on the language of the old to proclaim something new.
Did you enjoy this article?
Subscribe to receive an email each time we publish new content!
About the interview participant
Kyle Beshears is the author of the chapter, “‘That Sacred Depository’ Biblical Content in Joseph Smith’s 1832 First Vision Account” in Joseph Smith as a Visionary, published by Brigham Young University Religious Studies Center. He holds a PhD from the Southern Baptist Seminary and is a pastor in Mobile, Alabama. He is also the author of Apatheism: How We Share When They Don’t Care (B&H Academic) and the forthcoming 40 Questions About Mormonism (Kregel Academic).
Further Reading
- The First Vision of Joseph Smith
- How Well Do You Know Joseph Smith?
- What Did Joseph’s Family Know About the First Vision?
- How Did Memory Impact the First Vision Accounts?
- How Do These Churches View the First Vision Differently?
1832 First Vision Account Resources
- Joseph Smith as a Visionary: Heavenly Manifestations in the Latter-days (BYU RSC)
- History, Circa Summer 1832 (Joseph Smith Papers)
- The Earliest Documented Accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision (BYU RSC)
- Multiple Accounts of the First Vision (Gospel Topics)
- Accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision (Joseph Smith Papers)
- Special Issue: Joseph Smith’s First Vision (BYU Studies Quarterly)
Text of the 1832 First Vision Account
Note: The following text, including bolding and strikethrough formatting, is taken verbatim from the Joseph Smith Papers Project (JSP) website. Paragraphs have been created here at the original page break marks for ease of reading. See the JSP website for additional footnotes and context, including scribe identification and a Historical Introduction.
[Page 1]
A History of the life of Joseph Smith Jr. an account of his marvilous experience and of all the mighty acts which he doeth in the name of Jesus Ch[r]ist the son of the living God of whom he beareth record and also an account of the rise of the church of Christ in the eve of time according as the Lord brought forth and established by his hand <firstly> he receiving the testamony from on high seccondly the ministering of Angels thirdly the reception of the holy Priesthood by the ministring of—Aangels to adminster the letter of the Law <Gospel—> <—the Law and commandments as they were given unto him—> and in<the> ordinencs, forthly a confirmation and reception of the high Priesthood after the holy order of the son of the living God power and ordinence from on high to preach the Gospel in the administration and demonstration of the spirit the Kees of the Kingdom of God confered upon him and the continuation of the blessings of God to him &c——
I was born in the town of Charon [Sharon] in the <State> of Vermont North America on the twenty third day of December AD 1805 of goodly Parents who spared no pains to instruct<ing> me in <the> christian religion[.] at the age of about ten years my Father Joseph Smith Seignior moved to Palmyra Ontario County in the State of New York and being in indigent circumstances were obliged to labour hard for the support of a large Family having nine chilldren and as it required their exertions of all that were able to render any assistance for the support of the Family therefore we were deprived of the bennifit of an education suffice it to say I was mearly instructtid in reading and writing and the ground <rules> of Arithmatic which const[it]uted my whole literary acquirements. At about the age of twelve years my mind become seriously imprest
[Page 2]
with regard to the all importent concerns of for the wellfare of my immortal Soul which led me to searching the scriptures believeing as I was taught, that they contained the word of God thus applying myself to them and my intimate acquaintance with those of differant denominations led me to marvel excedingly for I discovered that <they did not adorn> instead of adorning their profession by a holy walk and Godly conversation agreeable to what I found contained in that sacred depository this was a grief to my Soul thus from the age of twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things in my heart concerning the sittuation of the world of mankind the contentions and divi[si]ons the wicke[d]ness and abominations and the darkness which pervaded the of the minds of mankind my mind become excedingly distressed for I become convicted of my sins and by searching the scriptures I found that mand <mankind> did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatised from the true and liveing faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the new testament and I felt to mourn for my own sins and for the sins of the world for I learned in the scriptures that God was the same yesterday to day and forever that he was no respecter to persons for he was God for I looked upon the sun the glorious luminary of the earth and also the moon rolling in their magesty through the heavens and also the stars shining in their courses and the earth also upon which I stood and the beast of the field and the fowls of heaven and the fish of the waters and also man walking forth upon the face of the earth in magesty and in the strength of beauty whose power and intiligence in governing the things which are so exceding great and
[Page 3]
marvilous even in the likeness of him who created him <them> and when I considered upon these things my heart exclaimed well hath the wise man said the <it is a> fool <that> saith in his heart there is no God my heart exclaimed all all these bear testimony and bespeak an omnipotant and omnipreasant power a being who makith Laws and decreeeth and bindeth all things in their bounds who filleth Eternity who was and is and will be from all Eternity to Eternity and when <I> considered all these things and that <that> being seeketh such to worshep him as worship him in spirit and in truth therefore I cried unto the Lord for mercy for there was none else to whom I could go and to obtain mercy 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 piller of fire light above the brightness of the sun at noon day 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 and he spake unto me saying Joseph <my son> thy sins are forgiven thee. go thy <way> walk in my statutes and keep my commandments behold I am the Lord of glory I was crucifyed for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life <behold> the world lieth in sin and at this time and none doeth good no not one 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 and mine anger is kindling against the inhabitants of the earth to visit them acording to thir ungodliness and to bring to pass that which <hath> been spoken by the mouth of the prophets and Ap[o]stles behold and lo I come quickly as it [is?] written of me in the cloud <clothed> in the glory of my Father and my soul was filled with love and for many days I could rejoice with great Joy and the Lord was with me but could find none that would believe the hevnly vision nevertheless I pondered these things in my heart about that time my mother and but after many days
[Page 4]
I fell into transgressions and sinned in many things which brought a wound upon my soul and there were many things which transpired that cannot be writen and my Fathers family have suffered many persicutions and afflictions and it came to pass when I was seventeen years of age I called again upon the Lord and he shewed unto me a heavenly vision for behold an angel of the Lord came and stood before me and it was by night and he called me by name and he said the Lord had forgiven me my sins and he revealed unto me that in the Town of Manchester Ontario County N.Y. there was plates of gold upon which there was engravings which was engraven by Maroni & his fathers the servants of the living God in ancient days and deposited by th[e] commandments of God and kept by the power thereof and that I should go and get them and he revealed unto me many things concerning the inhabitents of of the earth which since have been revealed in commandments & revelations and it was on the 22d day of Sept. AD 1◊82 1822 and thus he appeared unto me three times in one night and once on the next day and then I immediately went to the place and found where the plates was deposited as the angel of the Lord had commanded me and straightway made three attempts to get them and then being excedingly frightened I supposed it had been a dreem of Vision but when I considred I knew that it was not therefore I cried unto the Lord in the agony of my soul why can I not obtain them behold the angel appeared unto me again and said unto me you have not kept the commandments of the Lord which I gave unto you therefore you cannot now obtain them for the time is not yet fulfilled therefore thou wast left unto temptation that thou mightest be made accquainted of with the power of the advisary therefore repent and call on the Lord thou shalt be forgiven and in his own due time thou shalt obtain them
[Page 5]
for now I had been tempted of the advisary and saught the Plates to obtain riches and kept not the commandme[n]t that I should have an eye single to the Glory of God therefore I was chastened and saught diligently to obtain the plates and obtained them not untill I was twenty one years of age and in this year I was married to Emma Hale Daughtr of Isaach [Isaac] Hale who lived in Harmony Susquehan[n]a County Pensylvania on the 18th January AD, 1827, on the 22d day of Sept of this same year I obtained the plat[e]s—and the in December following we mooved to Susquehana by the assistence of a man by the name of Martin Har[r]is who became convinced of th[e] vision and gave me fifty Dollars to bare my expences and because of his faith and this rightheous deed the Lord appeared unto him in a vision and shewed unto him his marvilous work which he was about to do and <h[e]> imediately came to Suquehannah and said the Lord had shown him that he must go to new York City <with> some of the characters so we proceeded to coppy some of them and he took his Journy to the Eastern Cittys and to the Learned <saying> read this I pray thee and the learned said I cannot but if he would bring the blates [plates] they would read it but the Lord had forbid it and he returned to me and gave them to <me> <to> translate and I said I said cannot for I am not learned but the Lord had prepared spectticke spectacles for to read the Book therefore I commenced translating the characters and thus the Propicy [prophecy] of Isiaah was fulfilled which is writen in the 29 chaptr concerning the book and it came to pass that after we had translated 116 pages that he desired to carry them to read to his friends that peradventur he might convince them of the truth therefore I inquired of the Lord and the Lord said unto me that he must not take them and I spake unto him (Martin) the word of the Lord
[Page 6]
and he said inquire again and I inquired again and also the third time and the Lord said unto me let him go with them only he shall covenant with me that he will not shew them to only but four persons and he covenented withe Lord that he would do according to the word of the Lord therefore he took them and took his journey unto his friends to Palmire [Palmyra] Wayne County & State of N York and he brake the covenent which he made before the Lord and the Lord suffered the writings to fall into the hands of wicked men and Martin was Chastened for his transgression and I also was chastened also for my transgression for asking the Lord the third time wherefore the Plates was taken from me by the power of God and I was not able to obtain them for a season and it came to pass afte[r] much humility and affliction of Soul I obtained them again when Lord appeared unto a young man by the name of Oliver Cowd[e]ry and shewed unto him the plates in a vision and also the truth of the work and what the Lord was about to do through me his unworthy Servant therefore he was desiorous to come and write for me and to translate now my wife had writen some for me to translate and also my Brothr Samuel H Smith but we had become reduced in property and my wives father was about to turn me out of doores I & I had not where to go and I cried unto the Lord that he would provide for me to accomplish the work whereunto he had commanded me [4 lines blank]
