mfbukowski Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 I always carry a pocket knife that I have infused with the power to cut occasional tree branches, open packages, and use to do all sorts of other magical things. It has symbols on it too. They spell "C-H-I-N-A" which indicate it's exotic origins in a far away mysterious Eastern country. I am never without it, and I can testify that it has enabled me to do many things I could never do without it.
volgadon Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Agreed. Even if it was his it "proves" nothing. I have a little clock shaped like Buddha at home. What does this tell you, other than that I am awesome? But as I noted, it can't be proven to be his, and the evidence leans in the opposite direction.I had a hamsa on my mission. Its a hand-shaped amulet, with an eye in the centre, a protection against the evil eye.I only carried it because my sister gave it to me.
Calm Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Jay M. Todd?Yep.I did a google and couldn't find anything.
Chris Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 IMO, I would find it very strange if any LDS prophet wore a talisman. I wouldn't draw any absolute conclusions on whether Joseph Smith wore one and if he did what it implies, if anything at all.I know that many new members bring a lot of cultural with them as they join the church... I wonder if any of them have been asked to stop wearing, say, a cross? Is there a current policy in the Church that forbids wearing things like a talisman? I know this may not have to do with the topic...but I'm just curious...
cdowis Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 When all the evidence is weighed, and as we know in the times back then it was common for people to believe in such things, why is it such a big deal to just admith the Jupiter Talisman did belong to Joseph Smith?OK, he owned the talisman. So what.
Chris Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 OK, he owned the talisman. So what.Perhaps critics are trying to argue that it implies that Joseph Smith believed in the "magical power" of the talisman. If this is so, why does Joseph Smith, who had an absolute knowledge of the existence of God, believe in something that's not of God? (I realize Joseph Smith attempted to rely on magic in his early days...but why wouldn't he give it up after seeing God, receiving revelations, coming to the knowledge of truth, etc?)
Tsuzuki Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Perhaps critics are trying to argue that it implies that Joseph Smith believed in the "magical power" of the talisman. If this is so, why does Joseph Smith, who had an absolute knowledge of the existence of God, believe in something that's not of God? (I realize Joseph Smith attempted to rely on magic in his early days...but why wouldn't he give it up after seeing God, receiving revelations, coming to the knowledge of truth, etc?)This makes the assumption that no magic is of God. If (at least some) magic was of God, then it would stand to reason that Smith's dealings with God would reinforce his magic.
volgadon Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 "'Mr. Thompson, an employee of Mr. Stowell, was the next witness. . . . Smith had told the Deacon that very many years before a band of robbers had buried on his flat a box of treasure, and as it was very valuable they had by a sacrifice placed a charm over it to protect it, so that it could not be obtained except by faith, accompanied by certain talismanic influences. . . . the box of treasure was struck by the shovel, on which they redoubled their energies, but it gradually receded from their grasp. One of the men placed his hand upon the box, but it gradually sunk from his reach. . . . Mr. Stowell went to his flock and selected a fine vigorous lamb, and resolved to sacrifice it to the demon spirit who guarded the coveted treasure . . . but the treasure still receded from their grasp, and it was never obtained.'Off-topic, but I'm reminded of a Gogol story from the 1830s. St. John's Eve.
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 I asked the question. Since I don't have a collection of Ensigns to pull from, can you attest that it never was presented in the Ensign? I haven't looked on the web, but if I can't find it I'll retract the Ensign comment, though the source of this whole thing is from an LDS scholar.Durham did not know what he was talking about in most of his above presentation. He himself also wrote a letter clarifying things as to what he said and what he was doing when he said it. Some would call the second letter self-serving, but...
Mike Reed Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 I wonder if any of them have been asked to stop wearing, say, a cross? Did someone call?
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 * * *When all the evidence is weighed, and as we know in the times back then it was common for people to believe in such things, why is it such a big deal to just admith the Jupiter Talisman did belong to Joseph Smith?Lack of provenance. I would like to see something better than "he said that he said that she said that so and so owned it and highly prized it" methodology.That it was not listed amongst the possessions of the dead is pretty damning evidence against.
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Did someone call? Hey Mike, I was wondering whether you ever got hold of a photo of that Royal Arch cipher manuscript that Brigham Young was supposed to use. It actually is pertinent to this thread, too, if one thinks about it.You see, if Joseph Smith actually did own it, he might have had access to Barrett's book. And if that were the case,...well, anyway....Have you the evidence?
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Anyone have Quinn's Early Mormonism etc. I'd like to know what the reference "Todd 1969, 328, 330" (from the quote of his quote on Mormon Coffee) is to.I am guessing it is Jay M. Todd, The Saga of the Book of Abraham (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1969), 328, 330. Unfortunately, no I do not appear to own a copy of this book. I thought I did but I just found a box of my books destroyed by water and covered with mold. Errrrrgh!And, no, I do not have a copy of Quinn's work mentioned above. I got tired of all the fake and padded and redefined footnotes and eliminated it from my collection. Probably should have kept it, though. Hindsight is 20/20...
volgadon Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 I do have a copy, but it is almost 10000 miles away at the moment.
LifeOnaPlate Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 I do have a copy, but it is almost 10000 miles away at the moment.Are you in outer space?
Calm Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Lack of provenance. I would like to see something better than "he said that he said that she said that so and so owned it and highly prized it" methodology.That it was not listed amongst the possessions of the dead is pretty damning evidence against.Especially since that was the claim, that it was in his pocket.
Calm Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 I thought I did but I just found a box of my books destroyed by water and covered with mold. Errrrrgh!Now that is extremely annoying for you, thanks for trying.I will go ask at FAIR as I haven't bugged them for awhile.
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Especially since that was the claim, that it was in his pocket.Exactly right! Everything on their persons were inventoried and recorded. I am certain that something like this would have been recorded. Another damning evidence against is the fact that it was pierced with a hole because it was intended to be worn. I am aware of absolutely zero evidence that he wore anything like that, and Joseph was not afraid to take his shirt off when the need arose. Someone, somewhere, would have noticed his little good luck piece--were it his, that is.
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Now that is extremely annoying for you, thanks for trying....Oh, it was! I have no idea what is in that box right now. I also could not find my Church magazines, either, for the longest time. Every single Ensign I have ever owned over the decades was soaking wet and covered with mold. Found a leak that came from the ceiling and because boxes were blocking where the leak was I never noticed it. I am so bummed. Several other boxes of papers and other things are similarly ruined.
Calm Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Oh, it was! I have no idea what is in that box right now. I also could not find my Church magazines, either, for the longest time. Every single Ensign I have ever owned over the decades was soaking wet and covered with mold. Found a leak that came from the ceiling and because boxes were blocking where the leak was I never noticed it. I am so bummed. Several other boxes of papers and other things are similarly ruined. Sounds like you will be busy with an unpleasant task. Hopefully though it will not lead you to take another vacation from us as it's been very nice having you around again.
MormonMason Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Sounds like you will be busy with an unpleasant task. Hopefully though it will not lead you to take another vacation from us as it's been very nice having you around again. Thank you for your kind words.Yes, it will be a most unpleasant task, especially since I am allergic to molds. It also is sad because I hate it when books are destroyed. And, of course, I have now lost all my Church magazines as well as who but God knows what else. I never would have thought that a leak from the ceiling would reach all the way to the basement ceiling without showing itself upstairs first...
Wiki Wonka Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 *sigh*This is one of the reasons (amongst others, namely the lack of footnotes/endnotes to primary sources) that make me think "Mormonthink," and similar sites (i.e. TheMoCurtain) are almost completely worthless. Here we seeminly have someone who wasn
cdowis Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Perhaps critics are trying to argue that it implies that Joseph Smith believed in the "magical power" of the talisman.Critics say alot of things, most of which is nonsense. If this is so, why does Joseph Smith, who had an absolute knowledge of the existence of God, believe in something that's not of God? Most critics have seriously flawed assumptions, and this is one of them. If I carry a rabbit's foot, does that mean I believe in magic? There may be many reasons to carry this object. For example, it may not have been a "talisman" but the symbol itself may have peaked his curosity. He took it out from time to time to think about the meaning behind the symbol and whether it contain anything meaningful.Look at his interest in Egyptian artifacts, symbols in the temple, symbols mention in the scriptures. It may have been an ibnteresting puzzle, similar to a rubic cube to us today.I ignore assertions and assumptions by the critics. There is only ONE possibility in their twisted minds, and I have exhausted myself showing how there are multiple possibilities. I now ignore their silly assertions, and suggest the same to you.(I realize Joseph Smith attempted to rely on magic in his early days...but why wouldn't he give it up after seeing God, receiving revelations, coming to the knowledge of truth, etc?)
Wiki Wonka Posted November 7, 2009 Posted November 7, 2009 Now that is extremely annoying for you, thanks for trying.I will go ask at FAIR as I haven't bugged them for awhile.I have Quinn's "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View." Does the "Mormon Coffee" web site provide a page number? (I don't have time right now to search for it, but if you can direct me where to look I'll search for it tonight.)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.