The current prophet believes Joseph Smith was not a man.

When you start out with poppycock like that, how am I supposed to take the rest of your comment seriously?

This passage never says or clams [sic] who the personages are.

So we’re supposed to ignore everything else Joseph ever said in his life about speaking to God and Christ, and just focus on this one sentence?

Why are you engaging in this foolishness?

Last night I realized something the church teaches differs from what is in the Joseph Smith History.

JS-H 1:17 reads:

“. . . I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!”

We are taught God and Jesus appeared to Joseph Smith. This passage never says or clams who the personages are. So the phrase “When the Legend Becomes Fact, Print the Legend” does not apply here. But this phrase does. “When the print is found to be false, deny the evidence.”

After you’ve read a few of these, Google in “statement of faith lds” and read how others show why our Articles of Faith vary from a “Christian” statement of faith.

We are to acknowledge this great gift from Him through Jos. Smith. Contemporary statements of faith now penned by almost all Christian religious groups – after much discussion, debate, careful wording and as mentioned above, by vote. As I read the SoF of other groups, I do not come away feeling words have been inspired as I do with our Articles of Faith. That is what Pres. Hinckley was getting at.

Groups with a statement of faith will ask potential church members, potential students and employees sign that statement. Many parents are faced with signing statements of faith for schools, colleges, and homeschool groups. It is increasingly, becoming a way to discriminate and even profile members of other religions and deny them services, employment, and admission to a variety of groups – and yes, even areas to live (a whole new topic for another day – how Christian realtors assist in the formation of Christian only communities and communities with Christian HoAs).

President Hinckley isn’t getting at anything more complicated than that.

It seems in this case that the only way to determine that one’s knowledge of the nature of diety is not man made would be if a)we ourselves received a direct visitation from God or b)we received a legitimate divine communication that Joseph did receive a direct visitation.

I assume Pres. Hinckley was actually refering to his experience with option b. If, hypothetically speaking, option b occured in reality, then Pres. Hinckley could rationally assume that Joseph’s description is not man-made as compared to mere speculations.

You asked to be enlightened and that is why I respond the way that I do. It’s not enlightenment, but rather the controversy that you might stimulate that charges your batteries.

If you read the talk carefully you would understand that our definition of God came from Joseph’s experience in the Sacred Grove, not a debate on the nature of God, as was the case with the Nicene Creed. But somehow I think you already knew that. :>)