Talk:First Vision accounts

James B. Allen, who became LDS Assistant Church Historian in 1972 commented about the general lack of knowledge among early church members regarding Joseph Smith’s first vision:

“According to Joseph Smith, he told the story of the vision immediately after it happened in the early spring of 1820. As a result, he said, he received immediate criticism in the community. There is little if any evidence, however, that by the early 1830’s Joseph Smith was telling the story in public. At least if he were telling it, no one seemed to consider it important enough to have recorded it at the time, and no one was criticizing him for it….”

“The fact that none of the available contemporary writings about Joseph Smith in the 1830’s, none of the publications of the Church in that decade, and no contemporary journal or correspondence yet discovered mentions the story of the first vision is convincing evidence that at best it received only limited circulation in those early days…as far as non-Mormons were concerned there was little, if any, awareness of it in the 1830’s….”

“As far as Mormon literature is concerned, there was apparently no reference to Joseph Smith’s first vision in any published material in the 1830’s…. From all this it would appear that the general church membership did not receive information about the first vision until the 1840’s and that the story certainly did not hold the prominent place in Mormon thought as it does today….”

“As far as missionary work is concerned, it is evident that here, too, the story of the first vision had little, if any, importance in the 1830’s…it was not considered necessary for prospective converts to Mormonism to know the story…

“To summarize what has been said so far, it is apparent that Joseph Smith’s first vision was not given general circulation in the 1830’s. Neither Mormon nor non-Mormon publications made reference to it, and it is evident that the general membership of the Church knew little, if anything, about it. Belief in the story certainly was not a prerequisite for conversion, and it is obvious that the story was not being used for the purpose of illustrating other points of doctrine. In this respect, at least, Mormon thought in the 1830’s was different from Mormon thought of later years.” James B. Allen, Dialogue, A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, pp. 30-34