One of the issues that keeps getting brought up is the lack of evidence on the First Vision. It's been said repeatedly that there's "no historical evidence" that Smith had this vision and that it wasn't historically significant enough to be discussed in the context of his early life. Let me counter this with a short quote from the Preface to Robert Remini's biography on Joseph Smith:
"I should make it clear at the outset that I am not a Mormon. As such I faced several problems in writing this book, one of which involved Joseph's visions and revelations, which are crucial to an understanding of him, his Church, and the times in which he lived. After considerable thought I decided to present his religious experiences just as he described them in his writings and let readers decide for themselves to what extent they would give credence to them. I am not out to prove or disprove any of his claims. As a historian I have tried to be as objective as possible in narrating his life and work." (Remini p. x)
In his book, Remini presents the First Vision as Smith said it happened, the same as other biographers do, and the same way I believe we should do. Like Remini, we should not be trying to prove or disprove any of Smith's claims, but unlike Remini, or job is fairly simple. We don't have to worry about what was historical and what was not. We don't need to do original research. Our job is to reflect reliable sources. ~