Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.

Was Joseph Smith being guided by God when he used seer stones to find buried treasure?

You may select up to 2 options

 
 
View results

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

Read the original post from MADB and watch the path of deception this takes:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... c363a3295d

[quote=ttribe] on 06 April 2010 - 04:07 PM, said:
Ahhh, but they are "magic rocks" fastened in a bow attached to a breastplate. Naturally, that makes them much more acceptable than ones sitting in the bottom of a hat. [/quote]

As with any debate there are facts used to formulate an opinion. Let’s pick some facts from FairMormon:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon ... /1829-1835
Hostile news account 11 August 1829
and after penetrating “mother earth” a short distance, the [Golden] Bible was found, together with a huge pair of spectacles! He had been directed, however, not to let any mortal being examine them, “under no less penalty” than instant death! They were therefore nicely wrapped up and excluded from the “vulgar gaze of poor wicked mortals!” It was said that the leaves of the bible were plates of gold, about 8 inches long, 6 wide, and one eighth of an inch thick, on which were engraved characters or hyeroglyphics. By placing the spectacles in a hat, and looking into it, Smith could (he said so, at least,) interpret these characters.[1]
• Scribe: Not specified
• Curtain: Not specified
• Instrument: "Spectacles" (i.e., Nephite interpreters)
• Method: Spectacles in hat


Note in the reference above how the spectacles were used by placing them into a hat... they were not used as glasses like the Mormon websites portray falsely, as referenced here:

Image

And another eyewitness account by Martin Harris from the same FairMormon link:

Martin Harris (eyewitness), paraphrased in the The Gem 5 September 1829
“In the autumn of 1827 a man named Joseph Smith of Manchester, in Ontario County, said that he had been visited by the spirit of the Almighty in a dream, and informed that in a certain hill in that town was deposited a Golden Bible, containing an ancient record of divine origin. He states that after the third visit from the same spirit in a dream he proceeded to the spot, removed earth, and there found the bible, together with a large pair of spectacles. He had also been directed to let no mortal see them under the penalty of immediate death, which injunction he steadfastly adheres to. The treasure consisted of a number of gold plates, about 8 inches long, 6 wide, and one eighth of an inch thick, on which were engraved hieroglyphics. By placing the spectacles in a hat and looking into it, Smith interprets the characters into the English language

Hostile news account circa May 1830
A fellow by the name of Joseph Smith, who resides in the upper part of Susquehanna county, has been, for the last two years we are told, employed in dedicating as he says, by inspiration, a new bible. He pretended that he had been entrusted by God with a golden bible which had been always hidden from the world. Smith would put his face into a hat in which he had a white stone, and pretend to read from it, while his coadjutor transcribed


Note the specific use of “white stone” in the above, and the header of “hostile news account” to bias the reader in discounting it as a lie. It’s only “hostile” if it paints Joseph Smith in a bad light, but these accounts all say the same thing... and that's only Seer stones were used in a hat.

So what do we know about how the spectacles looked? Here’s a great source from a first-hand account:

http://thedigitalvoice.com/enigma/essays/AAffair1.htm
Professor Anthon's Two Letters

The first letter: to Eber D. Howe on February 17, 1834
(from Howe's Mormonism Unvailed pp. 270-272)

New York, Feb. 17, 1834.

Dear Sir -- I received this morning your favor of the 9th instant, and lose no time in making a reply. The whole story about my having pronounced the Mormonite inscription to be "reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics" is perfectly false. Some years ago, a plain, and apparently simple-hearted farmer, called upon me with a note from Dr. Mitchell of our city, now deceased, requesting me to decypher, if possible, a paper, which the farmer would hand me, and which Dr. M. confessed he had been unable to understand. Upon examining the paper in question, I soon came to the conclusion that it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax.

When I asked the person, who brought it, how he obtained the writing, he gave me, as far as I can now recollect, the following account: A "gold book," consisting of a number of plates of gold, fastened together in the shape of a book by wires of the same metal, had been dug up in the northern part of the state of New York, and along with the book an enormous pair of "gold spectacles"! These spectacles were so large, that, if a person attempted to look through them, his two eyes would have to be turned towards one of the glasses merely, the spectacles in question being altogether too large for the breadth of the human face. Whoever examined the plates through the spectacles, was enabled not only to read them, but fully to understand their meaning. All this knowledge, however, was confined at that time to a young man, who had the trunk containing the book and spectacles in his sole possession. This young man was placed behind a curtain, in the garret of a farm house, and being thus concealed from view, put on the spectacles occasionally, or rather, looked through one of the glasses, decyphered the characters in the book, and, having committed some of them to paper, handed copies from behind the curtain, to those who stood on the outside. Not a word, however, was said about the plates having been decyphered "by the gift of God." Everything, in this way, was effected by the large pair of spectacles. The farmer added, that he had been requested to contribute a sum of money towards the publication of the "golden book," the contents of which would, as he had been assured, produce an entire change in the world and save it from ruin. So urgent had been these solicitations, that he intended selling his farm and handing over the amount received to those who wished to publish the plates. As a last precautionary step, however, he had resolved to come to New York, and obtain the opinion of the learned about the meaning of the paper which he brought with him, and which had been given him as a part of the contents of the book, although no translation had been furnished at the time by the young man with the spectacles.


So we know the spectacles were too large to fit a human’s face, but they could fit into a stove-pipe hat. But what were these spectacles made of? Were they in fact the Urim Thummim? Consider this as previously quoted from FairMormon:


Did Joseph lose the seer stone(s) and/or the Urim and Thummim?
Following the loss of the 116 pages, the Lord told Joseph:
1 NOW, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them.
2 And you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened.
3 Nevertheless, it is now restored unto you again; therefore see that you are faithful and continue on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have begun.
4 Do not run faster or labor more than you have strength and means provided to enable you to translate; but be diligent unto the end. (D&C 10:1-4)


If you believe what the D&C says in 10:1, then the “spectacles” were in fact two seer stones wired together. What we know for a fact is that the Mormon church portrays the translation of the Book of Mormon as done with spectacles, but we know for a fact that is not true and they were in fact the Seer Stones Joseph Smith found before he wrote the Book of Mormon ...the same stones he used to find buried treasure for hire... this is an absolute fact and you are being intentionally deceived by Wiki Wonka’s response that they had anything to do with Urim and Thummim, because they were only seer stones and nothing else.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22509
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by moksha »

Ttribe on 06 April 2010 - 04:07 PM, said:

Ahhh, but they are "magic rocks" fastened in a bow attached to a breastplate. Naturally, that makes them much more acceptable than ones sitting in the bottom of a hat.


The Urim and Thummin of the Old Testament had two stones, with a Hebrew letter engraved on each side, attached with a bow to a breastplate. A breastplate is worn across the chest, not on the eyes.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

Dear Wiki Wonka,

I would like to respectfully ask you a question. Why do you continue to use the name "Urim and Thummim" when the only devices used to translate Mormon doctrine (outside of the lost 116 pages) were Joseph Smith's seer stones?

Edit to add - the brown one and the white one.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... ge__st__40
I think that your assessment is pretty accurate, and I have observed a number of decent folks there. In my opinion, the difficulty for active believers who might like to have a respectful discussion there comes from having to deal with those who continually make mocking references to the Church (e.g. people incapable of referring to the Church without calling it "LDS Inc.," or disparaging references such as "Little Tommy Monson.") You cannot have a reasonable discussion with someone who speaks like that. If someone asks me a real question that is devoid of obvious mockery, no matter who they are, then I'm happy to respond to them in kind. If someone wishes to bait me using mockery, I'll simply not respond at all. I think that many active LDS simply don't want to have to deal with it.

WW
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

Brant Gardner
Deacon
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:41 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by Brant Gardner »

thews wrote:Dear Wiki Wonka,

I would like to respectfully ask you a question. Why do you continue to use the name "Urim and Thummim" when the only devices used to translate Mormon doctrine (outside of the lost 116 pages) were Joseph Smith's seer stones?


The terms "Urim and Thummim" is used by tradition, a tradition that appears to have begun in 1833. The connection between both the interpreters and the seer stone used in translation was made about that time and became the popular way of referring to either. It found its way into Joseph's vocabulary as well.

With regards to your opening poll, I didn't answer because there isn't a response I can use. When Joseph found things with his stone when he functioned as a village seer, he did so the same way others who have used seer stones for that purpose have done. I don't see any particularly divine aspect to it. I also don't see anything "magical," save that is the label we have placed on the practice.

User avatar
Wiki Wonka
Teacher
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:19 pm

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by Wiki Wonka »

thews wrote:Dear Wiki Wonka,

I would like to respectfully ask you a question. Why do you continue to use the name "Urim and Thummim" when the only devices used to translate Mormon doctrine (outside of the lost 116 pages) were Joseph Smith's seer stones?

Edit to add - the brown one and the white one.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... ge__st__40
I think that your assessment is pretty accurate, and I have observed a number of decent folks there. In my opinion, the difficulty for active believers who might like to have a respectful discussion there comes from having to deal with those who continually make mocking references to the Church (e.g. people incapable of referring to the Church without calling it "LDS Inc.," or disparaging references such as "Little Tommy Monson.") You cannot have a reasonable discussion with someone who speaks like that. If someone asks me a real question that is devoid of obvious mockery, no matter who they are, then I'm happy to respond to them in kind. If someone wishes to bait me using mockery, I'll simply not respond at all. I think that many active LDS simply don't want to have to deal with it.

WW


Hi Thews,

I apologize for the delay in responding, but I didn't realize that you had asked me a question on this thread until just now when I noticed Brant's post. Brant is actually much more qualified to answer it than I am.

My understanding is that the term "Urim and Thummin" was applied by members of the Church years later, and that it was applied initially to the Nephite interpreters and then later to the seer stone used to translate the Book of Mormon. I believe that Oliver Cowdery was one of those who applied the term "Urim and Thummin" to refer to the translation process. This would indicate that he was referring to the seer stone, since that is what was being used at the time. Since Oliver didn't mention the seer stone explicitly, it can only be inferred.

WW
We cannot gauge the worth of another soul any more than we can measure the span of the universe. Every person we meet is a VIP to our Heavenly Father.
President Uchtdorf, April 4, 2010

FairMormon Answers Wiki

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

Wiki Wonka wrote:
Hi Thews,

I apologize for the delay in responding, but I didn't realize that you had asked me a question on this thread until just now when I noticed Brant's post. Brant is actually much more qualified to answer it than I am.

My understanding is that the term "Urim and Thummin" was applied by members of the Church years later, and that it was applied initially to the Nephite interpreters and then later to the seer stone used to translate the Book of Mormon. I believe that Oliver Cowdery was one of those who applied the term "Urim and Thummin" to refer to the translation process. This would indicate that he was referring to the seer stone, since that is what was being used at the time. Since Oliver didn't mention the seer stone explicitly, it can only be inferred.

WW


Thanks WW for the response. I would love a reply of this question by Brant, as I don't understand it. My question centers on D&C 10 where it states the Urim and Thummim were "lost". Calling a seer stone the Urim and Thummim doesn't make sense to me as they were taken away as punishment, so there must have been two Urim's and Thummim's? From what I understand, after the Urim and Thummim were taken back after the lost 116 pages, seer stones were used after that. Is that a correct assumption? Thanks.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

Brant Gardner
Deacon
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:41 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by Brant Gardner »

thews wrote:My question centers on D&C 10 where it states the Urim and Thummim were "lost". Calling a seer stone the Urim and Thummim doesn't make sense to me as they were taken away as punishment, so there must have been two Urim's and Thummim's? From what I understand, after the Urim and Thummim were taken back after the lost 116 pages, seer stones were used after that. Is that a correct assumption? Thanks.


The original name for the instruments delivered with the plates was the "interpreters." Joseph had more than one seer stone prior to that time.

The name Urim and Thummim is obviously biblical, and the best information indicates it wasn't applied to the interpreters or the seer stone until W.W. Phelps made the comparison in 1833. After that time, it became the popular designation for the both the interpreters and the seer stone. The only way to know which of the instruments "Urim and Thummim" refers to is to know time tables.

Regardless of which of the two types of mechanical instruments used (interpreters or seer stones), it appears that the actual use of the instrument was fundamentally the same. From the view of the text produced, there was no difference in the instrument used.
It appears that the interpreters were used for the 116 pages (though I suspect not exclusively). A seer stone was used for the rest (meaning the text we now have) according to Emma.

User avatar
SoHo
Bishop
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by SoHo »

Brant Gardner wrote:
thews wrote:My question centers on D&C 10 where it states the Urim and Thummim were "lost". Calling a seer stone the Urim and Thummim doesn't make sense to me as they were taken away as punishment, so there must have been two Urim's and Thummim's? From what I understand, after the Urim and Thummim were taken back after the lost 116 pages, seer stones were used after that. Is that a correct assumption? Thanks.


The original name for the instruments delivered with the plates was the "interpreters." Joseph had more than one seer stone prior to that time.

The name Urim and Thummim is obviously biblical, and the best information indicates it wasn't applied to the interpreters or the seer stone until W.W. Phelps made the comparison in 1833. After that time, it became the popular designation for the both the interpreters and the seer stone. The only way to know which of the instruments "Urim and Thummim" refers to is to know time tables.

Regardless of which of the two types of mechanical instruments used (interpreters or seer stones), it appears that the actual use of the instrument was fundamentally the same. From the view of the text produced, there was no difference in the instrument used.
It appears that the interpreters were used for the 116 pages (though I suspect not exclusively). A seer stone was used for the rest (meaning the text we now have) according to Emma.


When this information makes its way into Primary materials, then it will be easier to accept that the use of Urim and Thummim isn't simply intended to suggest a specific method of translation other than stone, head and hat.
"One of the surest ways to avoid even getting near false doctrine is to choose to be simple in our teaching." - Elder Henry B. Eyring, Ensign, May 1999, 74

Brant Gardner
Deacon
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:41 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by Brant Gardner »

SoHo wrote:When this information makes its way into Primary materials, then it will be easier to accept that the use of Urim and Thummim isn't simply intended to suggest a specific method of translation other than stone, head and hat.

Wow, there is so much wrong is such a short statement.

Let's start with the implication that the reason that the Urim and Thummim is used is to suggest some means other than the rock in the hat. That tells me that you completely misunderstand the historical development that led to that association. By misunderstanding the original reason, you impute something to it that simply was never there.

Second, we have the suggestion that this information should make it into primary manuals. That tells me that you have two places where your logic has issues. The first is in the nature of primary education. There is quite a bit of information that I might teach adults that I don't find relevant to primary age students. Their needs are different. When you teach the message of the gospel, you teach the message, not the details. I do not teach primary age children the documentary hypothesis. I don't teach them issues of textual transmission in the Bible. That doesn't mean that I am hiding such complexities from them. It means that there are other things that are more important to learn first.

Next, we have the assumption that the rock in the hat method somehow alters the nature of the resulting translation. I am at a loss to know why or how. When Joseph said it happened by the gift and power of God, is that explanation altered by any aspect of the process? Do we need to make sure that we teach that Joseph of Egypt scryed in a cup? Is that aspect more important than his correct intepretation of dreams? Does that method alter his place in history (Biblical history here - we can argue secular history at a different time).

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

Brant Gardner wrote:The original name for the instruments delivered with the plates was the "interpreters." Joseph had more than one seer stone prior to that time.


Thanks for the reply. What we both agree on then, is that prior to the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith already had his brown and white seer stones, and those stones were found using the green stone of Sally Chase.

The name Urim and Thummim is obviously biblical, and the best information indicates it wasn't applied to the interpreters or the seer stone until W.W. Phelps made the comparison in 1833. After that time, it became the popular designation for the both the interpreters and the seer stone. The only way to know which of the instruments "Urim and Thummim" refers to is to know time tables.


This is where I’m losing your explanation. If the D&C 10 states the Urim and Thummim were “lost”, regardless of time tables the X axis is defined at the point the 116 pages were lost, and with them so were the Urim and Thummim. My point is that calling anything used after the 116 pages were lost could be anything but the Urim and Thummim, because they were specifically defined as “lost” as punishment.

Regardless of which of the two types of mechanical instruments used (interpreters or seer stones), it appears that the actual use of the instrument was fundamentally the same. From the view of the text produced, there was no difference in the instrument used.


I don’t understand? What do you mean by “instrument” in the above? A seer stone was used in a hat, and this is what we do know with absolute certainty. To imply, “actual use of the instrument was fundamentally the same” doesn’t change the device used, regardless of what your opinion is on how it was used.

It appears that the interpreters were used for the 116 pages (though I suspect not exclusively). A seer stone was used for the rest (meaning the text we now have) according to Emma.


Ok thanks. One more time though, why would you imply the interpreters could be used after the lost 116 pages? The D&C is specific on this, isn’t it?
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

Brant Gardner
Deacon
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:41 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by Brant Gardner »

thews wrote:This is where I’m losing your explanation. If the D&C 10 states the Urim and Thummim were “lost”, regardless of time tables the X axis is defined at the point the 116 pages were lost, and with them so were the Urim and Thummim. My point is that calling anything used after the 116 pages were lost could be anything but the Urim and Thummim, because they were specifically defined as “lost” as punishment.

Your confusion is one of terminology. The use of the phrase "Urim and Thummim" to describe the interpreters post-dates the events you reference. The therm "Urim and Thummim" was a later insert in D&C 10.

The interpreters were taken back.

What do you mean by “instrument” in the above?

The interpreters were used for the 116 pages (at least the majority of the time, I have seen a reference that leads me to suspect that they might not have been used exclusively). A chocolate colored seer stone was used for the text we currently have.

A seer stone was used in a hat, and this is what we do know with absolute certainty. To imply, “actual use of the instrument was fundamentally the same” doesn’t change the device used, regardless of what your opinion is on how it was used.

I don't understand your confusion. I hoped that I was clear that the translation was a translation regardless of the particular physical instrument used. The instrument and the result are quite different things and each require different explanations. For example, if I translate a document and use pencil and paper or a word processor, is the quality of the translation any different?

For example, I might explain how scryers use their instruments and why the can "see" in them. That cannot explain a translation coming from them. I know of no other instance where scrying produced a translation (save in the Book of Mormon, but that complicates things only slightly).

Ok thanks. One more time though, why would you imply the interpreters could be used after the lost 116 pages? The D&C is specific on this, isn’t it?

If I gave the impression that the interpreters were used after the translation of the 116 pages, I apologize for that erroneous impression. I don't know of any instrument other than the seer stone after that time.

User avatar
SoHo
Bishop
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by SoHo »

Brant Gardner wrote:
SoHo wrote:When this information makes its way into Primary materials, then it will be easier to accept that the use of Urim and Thummim isn't simply intended to suggest a specific method of translation other than stone, head and hat.

Wow, there is so much wrong is such a short statement.

Let's start with the implication that the reason that the Urim and Thummim is used is to suggest some means other than the rock in the hat. That tells me that you completely misunderstand the historical development that led to that association. By misunderstanding the original reason, you impute something to it that simply was never there.

Second, we have the suggestion that this information should make it into primary manuals. That tells me that you have two places where your logic has issues. The first is in the nature of primary education. There is quite a bit of information that I might teach adults that I don't find relevant to primary age students. Their needs are different. When you teach the message of the gospel, you teach the message, not the details. I do not teach primary age children the documentary hypothesis. I don't teach them issues of textual transmission in the Bible. That doesn't mean that I am hiding such complexities from them. It means that there are other things that are more important to learn first.

Next, we have the assumption that the rock in the hat method somehow alters the nature of the resulting translation. I am at a loss to know why or how. When Joseph said it happened by the gift and power of God, is that explanation altered by any aspect of the process? Do we need to make sure that we teach that Joseph of Egypt scryed in a cup? Is that aspect more important than his correct intepretation of dreams? Does that method alter his place in history (Biblical history here - we can argue secular history at a different time).


Brant - don't tell me what I do and don't understand. Go on "Ask A Missionary" on the LDS website and ask a random ten respondents about the translation process - and then come back and report as to how many convey such a developed view, or even acknowledge the head-in-the-hat method. While one can draw a logical conclusion that it shouldn't really matter, why is one method so singularly favored over others in terms of presentation by the church?
"One of the surest ways to avoid even getting near false doctrine is to choose to be simple in our teaching." - Elder Henry B. Eyring, Ensign, May 1999, 74

Brant Gardner
Deacon
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:41 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by Brant Gardner »

SoHo wrote:Brant - don't tell me what I do and don't understand.

You are right. You clearly don't understand what you don't understand, and are not interesting in a discussion that might enlighten. My apologies for mistakenly assuming you wanted an answer.

User avatar
SoHo
Bishop
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:37 pm

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by SoHo »

Brant Gardner wrote:
SoHo wrote:Brant - don't tell me what I do and don't understand.

You are right. You clearly don't understand what you don't understand, and are not interesting in a discussion that might enlighten. My apologies for mistakenly assuming you wanted an answer.


I might actually be quite "interesting" in a discussion that might enlighten, depends on the subject. There is a difference between intentional messaging and the degree to which such messaging is actually necessary.
"One of the surest ways to avoid even getting near false doctrine is to choose to be simple in our teaching." - Elder Henry B. Eyring, Ensign, May 1999, 74

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12530&start=294

There's a lot of data in this thread and I wanted to link it. Facts highlighted with a question no Mormon can answer:

1) Joe Smith believed in the magical power in the green rock of Sally Chase.
2) Sally Chase was not being guided by God.
3) Joe Smith found his magical rock using the magical green rock of Sally Chase.
4) Joe Smith got paid $14 a month for using his magical rock to find buried treasure before the BofM.
5) Joe Smith was not being guided by God when he used his magical rock to find buried treasure for hire.
6) Brant Gardner stated, “There are two critical differences between the con men and the village seers. First, the charlatans were transients and the village seers were residential. The second is that the con man elicited money for his talents, and the village seers were consulted.”
7) Joe Smith was denied entrance into the Methodist church in 1828 for being a “practicing necromancer”.
8) Joe Smith used the exact same magical rock he was paid to use to find buried treasure for hire to translate the Book of Mormon.

Question: By acknowledging the 8 points above, was Joe Smith delving into occult magic by using his magical seer stone to find buried treasure when he was paid $14?
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

I found out some new info on the fate of the Urim and Thummim from ttribe and wanted to post it in here. In the thread over at MADB, we find a reference to Joseph Smith using the "Urim and Thummim" on the 12th of July 1843. Since the "Urim and Thummim" were just another name for his seer stones (brown and white ones which the LDS church still has), the fate of the magic rocks is verified to have been used a year before Joseph Smith was killed, so any question about them being taken back is verified to be false. For reference see post #50:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... ge__st__40


Also, if I haven't linked it, this thread is worth reading as there's some great opinion from Brant Gardner and Joseph Antley in it:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12999&start=0

To set the record straight on the chaging of LDS history to inject "Urim and Thummim" three years after the fact in 1833:


1) The Doctrine and Covenants was originally called the “Book of Commandments” and it didn’t use the words “Urim and Thummim” until 1833, or three years after the book of Mormon.

BC 9:1, p. 22 — Now, behold I say unto you, that because you delivered up so many writings, which you had power to translate, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them, and you also lost your gift at the same time …
[Harmony, Pennsylvania May 1829]
The revelation (already written and published) in The Doctrine and Covenants10:1-3 was later changed to add “by means of the Urim and Thummim” which introduces doubt regarding whether or not they were “lost” along with the 116 pages. How the D&C reads after the change:
DOCTRINE and COVENANTS
1 NOW, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them.
2 and you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened.
3 Nevertheless, it is now restored unto you again; therefore see that you are faithful and continue on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have begun.
If you read the history of the church, the date reads as follows:
http://www.boap.org/...1c3history.html
History of the Church Vol.1
Chapter 3. [Jan. 1827 - Mar. 1829]
The Nephite Record Delivered To Joseph-- The Angel's Warning--The Work of Translation.

This implies it was all written from Jan. 1827 – Mar. 1829. The Notes section fills in some blanks:
http://www.boap.org/...1c3history.html

Notes Chapter 3
1. Most reports state that throughout the project Joseph used the "Nephite interpreters" or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone (see CHC 1:128-30). Both instruments were sometimes called by others the Urim and Thummim.
13. The term Urim and Thummim, while used in this revelation and in the ms text does not appear in early publications of the revelation, nor does it seem to have been used in any contemporary document of the principals. No early ms of this revelation survives apparently. In the 1833 Book of Commandments, verse one read "Now, behold I say unto you, that because you delivered up so many writings, which you had power to translate, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them. . . ." Thus, the words "by the means of the Urim and Thummim" in verse one were not part of this verse in the Book of Commandments; nor was section 17, which also makes use of the term Urim and Thummim, printed in the Book of Commandments. Both section 17 and verse one of section 10, as we now have them, first appeared in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. Lyndon Cook writes:
While the retroactive placement of the term in section 10 has led to some speculation relative to the Prophet's having the instrument in his possession, a preponderance of evidence confirms the Prophet's own testimony: "With the records was found a curious instrument, which the ancients called 'Urim and Thummim,' which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate" (History of the Church, 4:537 [Wentworth letter]). The problem here seems to be one of terminology, not whether or not the Prophet had possession of an ancient artifact. Until some time after the translation of the Book of Mormon, the sacred instruments may have been referred to as "Interpreters," or "spectacles." It is possible that Joseph Smith's inspired translation of the Bible played some part in designating the translating instrument "Urim and Thummim." The earliest use of the term Urim and Thummim in Mormon literature is in the Evening and Morning Star (January 1833). An article on the Book of Mormon, undoubtedly authored by W. W. Phelps, stated, "It was translated by the gift and power of God, by an unlearned man, through the aid of a pair of Interpreters, or spectacles--(known, perhaps in ancient days as Teraphim, or Urim and Thummim)." [RJS, 17]

In footnote 1, there’s an admission that a seer stone was used “or, for convenience, he would use a seer stone.” In footnote 13, it claims the preponderance of the evidence supports using the name Urim and Thummim, yet admits the name wasn’t published until 1833 at the earliest: “The earliest use of the term Urim and Thummim in Mormon literature is in the Evening and Morning Star (January 1833)”

For more discussion on this, you may want to read this thread:
http://www.mormonapo...entry1208862547

What do we know from Emma Smith? It’s funny, but when you Google the following quote, the part about his “face buried in his hat, with the stone in it” is missing from the Mormon sites:
Actual Quote:


. . . In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, after sitting by the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us. (The Saints' Herald, May 19, 1888, p. 310; )

How the quote reads when the part about the stone and hat is selectively removed (changed):
http://www.emmasmith....com/testimony/

. In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.


Edit to add this link on another thread about peep stones:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13884&start=0

And this one:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13931&p=346095#p346095
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

User avatar
thews
abstract
Posts: 3054
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am

Re: Joseph Smith's used of his seer stones to find objects

Post by thews »

Thought I'd post these words from the Mormon apologists on the outright deception the LDS uses to hide the truth about the head-in-hat with seer stone translation method:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Seer_stones
Question: Did Joseph lose the seer stone(s) and/or the Urim and Thummim?

Quote:
As a chastisement for this carelessness [loss of the 116 pages], the Urim and Thummim was taken from Smith. But by humbling himself, he again found favor with the Lord and was presented a strange oval-shaped, chocolate colored stone, about the size of an egg, but more flat which it was promised should answer the same purpose. With this stone all the present book was translated.


viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13931&start=42
thews wrote:In the above, when the use of the words, “he again found favor with the Lord and was presented a strange oval-shaped, chocolate colored stone,” what this sounds like is the brown oval-shaped stone was “presented” to Joseph Smith after the loss of the Nephite interpreters, which isn’t true, since Joseph Smith found this seer stone before the Book of Mormon. If you changed the word “presented” to “used” it would be truthful, as the brown seer stone was never “presented” to imply it was given to him by the Lord.


Response from Wiki Wonka:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13931&start=42
Wiki Wonka wrote:You are correct that the word "presented" is incorrectly used, however the sentence is a quote taken from Van Wagoner and Walker, and the footnote associated with it notes that it is making an incorrect assumption about the order of discovery. In fact, the wiki editor points this out in the lines preceding and following the quote you used:


So, while Wiki knows the use of "presented" along with the multiple incorrect uses mixing Urim and Thummim/Nephite interpreters with seer stones is incorrect, the Fair Wiki article stands with the false information and incorrect labels calling seer stones the U&T.

And then we have this from Daniel Peterson on the incorrect pictures used by the LDS church showing Joseph Smith translating without his head-in-hat:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... ge__st__80

gdog wrote:What are the reasons the church does not accurately show how the translation took place?


Daniel Peterson wrote:Here are three reasons:

1) Most members don't know much about Church history.

2) Mormon artists and their editors are pretty representative, in this sense, of the general membership.

3) Artistic representations of historical events are often quite inaccurate, in and out of the Church.


The one thing we can all agree on then is the Fair conclusion regarding seer stones is absolutely wrong:

FairMormon on seer stones wrote:Conclusion
The charge that the Church is "hiding" or "suppressing" this material cannot be sustained.


It's not only "sustained", but being intentionally "hidden" by Fair in presenting false information, as Joseph Smith was never "presented" with his brown magic seer stone he used to see dead Indians and buried treasure for $14 a month, as he "saw" the brown stone using his white one... the one he "saw" while peeping through the green stone of a known necromancer in Sally Chase.

It should be noted that this is a good example of why the LDS church warns its members to only seek information from Mormon-approved sources, as those sources present false information. The so-called "anti" sources are only the truths that the LDS wants to keep hidden.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths

Post Reply