Teaching my kids about LDS History

[Maureen]

Actually, in Gospel Topics on LDS.org, it discusses how and why the terms Urim and Thummim are used interchangeable with seer stone.

 

So, are you saying the church is "mistaken"?

 

I will take the church's word over that of a non-member any day.

 

Perhaps I should join a Protestant forum and repeatedly try to tell Protestants that I know more about their faith than they do.

 

But then, I don't feel a need to do that (nor do I possess the arrogance that would lead me to believe I know more about a faith than those who live that faith), nor do I have an axe to grind against them, making me obsessed with repeatedly getting in shots against their churches and members.

 

Leah, if you bothered to read the article I linked to, you would have hopefully understood that the article says there were both the Urim and Thummim (interpreters) and there was also a seer stone (multiple stones in fact). Let me refresh your memory:

 

Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone)...

 

My understanding is that the Urim and Thummim were like spectacles that were worn while the seer stone was put into a hat.

 

Try reading before you jump to judgmental conclusions.

 

M.

[Guest]

My understanding is that the Urim and Thummim were like spectacles that were worn while the seer stone was put into a hat.

The Nephite interpreters (later on called U&T but not the exact U&T in the OT) was with the Golden Plates. The stones that JS used he already had in his possession before he got the plates.

The Nephite interpreters were 2 stones set into something that may have looked like wire-rims on spectacles attached to a breastplate. It seems like its function is for somebody to put on the breastplate and lean forward to stick his eyes against the stones. But, from people's descriptions, the breastplate was too large and the stones too wide apart for Joseph to use it in this manner. So, he took the thing apart and just used the stones. But, he only used the Nephite stones for the Book of Lehi that got lost and maybe a chapter or two of Mosiah. The Book of Mormon that we have now was translated using the other stones at first and without the use of any interpreters at all later on, sometimes with the plates sitting unopened.

[Pa Pa]

Sorry but I too believe in the story of the seer stones in the hat.

One day we will all receive "seer stones" with our "new names", and the earth will become a seer stone where we will learn all things. (Revelation 2: 17) at least those who are worthy...many have already received their "new name". That was but one method, as early on Emma, Oliver and others helped scribe from the plates. There is nothing improper or deceitful.

[omegaseamaster75]

Maureen, I did not communicate clearly if you believe the things you shared contradicted me.  

 

In very plain language, I was saying that Joseph did not have his own "seer stone" in addition to the Urim and Thummim he received with the golden plates.  I do not claim that the Urim and Thummim itself is not a "seer stone."  It is not inaccurate to use the terms interchangeably.  

 

Furthermore, I was not addressing a specific statement from another user when I addressed this issue, I was simply sharing this fact to shed more light on the overall circumstances of the question being addressed and David Whitmer's views on the subject.

Joseph smith DID have his own seer stone, this is the stone to which David Witmer refers to, however this is in addition to the stone which the church currently has in its possession, his first seer stone, the egg/foot shaped brown stone.

 

 

 

 “Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)

 

..Joseph Fielding Smith, as an apostle, made clear that "the Seer Stone which was in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith in early days . . . is now in the possession of the Church." Elder Joseph Anderson, Assistant to the Council of the Twelve and long-time secretary to the First Presidency, clarified in 1971 that the "Seer Stone that Joseph Smith used in the early days of the Church is in possession of the Church and is kept in a safe in Joseph Fielding Smith's office.... [The stone is] slightly smaller than a chicken egg, oval, chocolate in color."^[26] (This would be Joseph's first, "shoe-shaped stone," which was given to Oliver Cowdery, and then to his brother-in-law Phineas Young, brother of Brigham Young

 

1. ↑ Van Wagoner and Walker, 58–59 (citations removed).
2. ↑ Van Wagoner and Walker, 58–59 (citations removed). See also Mark Ashurst-McGee, "A Pathway to Prophethood: Joseph Smith Junior as Rodsman, Village Seer, and Judeo-Christian Prophet," (Master's Thesis, University of Utah, Logan, Utah, 2000), 230.

[ether-ore]

We have very little description of how Joseph did the work of translating.  Most of what we have is from people who were said to have observed.  We have a story about him using his own seer stone in a hat.  We have a story about him using the Urim and Thummim and either way with the plates under a cloth on the other side of the room.  Here's the thing: God called Joseph Smith to do the translation and as far as I am concerned, how brother Joseph did it is really between God and Joseph.  Throughout scripture, the Lord has used multiple ways of communicating with His prophets.  Nobody seems to question that God spoke to Moses out of a burning bush and Moses then wrote it down,  It is said that God spoke into the minds of other prophets and they wrote it down.  The how doesn't matter.  The only question is, after reading it, did the Holy Spirit testify to your soul that it was true.  Questions about how Joseph did the job the Lord gave him (not us) to do is like asking God for proof other than the testimony of the Holy Ghost.  All of this is another example of people outside the church asking the church to "prove it".  If the Holy Spirit will not satisfy, nothing else will. This is what I would tell my children.

[LeSellers]

I wish I had said it first, but I'll gladly say it again: I have a testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ. I have a testimony of His Church and of His Gospel. I do not have a testimony of church history.

There are some truths that are more important than others, but I believe that "innoculating" our children against the slanders of those who would distort trival and even not-so-trivial events in church history is good practice. I'd much rather them hear that Joseph had twelve (or twenty-five) wives from me than from IRR. I can give them the context and the rationale. I can tell them of brother Brigham's aversion to the Principle and how he came to be converted to it. I can put Plural Marriage in its proper frame, and show how it is not only a principle of righteousness, but how it is a principle of charity and virtue.

Their being blindsided by vicious liars who use the truth as Satan did in the Garden of Eden: to sell his lies, does no one any good. I believe it has caused more heartache than any other source of apostasy.

That said, the important thing in all of this is that the Church is true, the Gospel is true, the Priesthood of God is the power of God, and that He has established His prophets from Joseph Smith onward as His spokesmen. They are human, and make mistakes, like all humans (Christ excepted), but that their mistakes and even their sins are not sufficient cause to ignore them and their work. It is a grave thing to accuse a prophet of serious sin and apostasy. I will leave that up to God, and I hope my children and grandchildren know that it is not their job to confess other people's sins, even when that other person is a prophet.

Lehi

Edited November 12, 2015 by LeSellers