Visions of Salvation: What Joseph Smith's Visions Reveal About Inheriting Heaven
This page is our own summary. The original belongs to BYU Religious Studies Center; please read it there.
A religious educator traces how Joseph Smith's visions shaped his understanding of salvation, the kingdoms of glory and salvation for the dead.
Mark A. Mathews, a religious educator with Seminaries and Institutes and an instructor for BYU Religious Education, wrote this article for the Religious Educator (vol. 26, no. 2, 2025) of the BYU Religious Studies Center. The full text is free to read on the RSC website. It follows how a series of visions shaped Joseph Smith's understanding of salvation.
A restoration that began with a question
Mathews notes that the Restoration started when young Joseph Smith wanted to know how to be saved in the kingdom of heaven. He argues that Joseph, unlike many religion teachers of his day, learned about heaven and hell by direct revelation, and that his understanding grew gradually through visions across his life.
The visions examined
The article looks at several key experiences: the First Vision, visits from angelic messengers, the revelation on the kingdoms of glory, and revelations about salvation for the dead. Together, the author says, they present a comprehensive doctrine of salvation grounded in faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost.
A wider view of heaven
Mathews emphasizes that these visions broadened the idea of salvation to include different kingdoms of glory and the possibility of salvation for those who died without the gospel. In his reading, this makes some degree of salvation in heaven possible for nearly everyone. He invites readers to reflect on the greatness of God's plan and the reach of the salvation offered through the Savior.
This is a summary of the article's abstract and opening sections; the full text includes the primary sources and a more detailed walk through each vision.
How we wrote this: we read the source page linked above and summarized it in our own words, quoting at most a short line with attribution. We have not added facts from outside that source. If anything here differs from the original, the original is correct.