Joseph'S Use Of Seership And The Seer Stone Before The Bom

[Ron Beron]

1. The prohibition was given at Sinai, long after Joseph was dead.

2. Joseph was playing an elaborate game with his brothers to avenge himself for being sold of them into slavery. Part of this involved scaring them with a line such as, "What deed is this that ye have done? wot ye not that such a man as I can certainly divine?" But no true divination was accomplished.

It certainly depends on what kind of prophet you are talking about...

* Some divined by the movement of the trees. In II Samuel 5:24 we read of gauging Israels attack against the Philistine by the movement of the trees. These diviners were called “Meonem”.

* There were also those called, “qesem” who divined according to rods or arrows. In Hosea 4:12 and I Samuel 20 we read of these diviners who divined according to the casting of arrows and rods.

* “Nahash” were also diviners in Israel who divined according to the movement of the serpent.

* The “yiddoni” were those “supernatural beings who possessed a knowledge beyond the human, which the diviner could extract from them by his special acts.

Further, there were ecstatic prophets called nabib which used exotic means to divine God's message while there were also "organizational" prophets such as Isaiah and Jeremiah which sought to reorganize Israel. Different prophets has different purposes.

[Aliwe]

So are you saying the commandment against divination was just limited to the Law of Moses? Why then do anti's make such a big deal about this issue today with Joseph Smith?

The Noahide laws cover gentiles and do not prohibit divination. But the Laws of Moses cover Mormons since they profess to have continuity with Judaism. I realize that Jesus, in 3 Nephi, claimed to fulfill the Law of Moses and proposed a new set of laws, but the twenty-eight imperatives he declared (which speak of tithing, and calling the Church in his name, etc) do not restate the moral code at Sinai, against murder, theft, etc. And yet Mormons still profess to obey those precepts, while ignoring the laws against eating shellfish, etc. That means there is a moral law, still in place, and a ceremonial law which has been abrogated. The law against divination is a moral law, not ceremonial. It is always wrong to practice sorceries, not just wrong on New Moons.

"The "silver cup" which Joseph in Egypt commanded the steward to put in Benjamin's sack, in order to try his brethren, was, most probably, sanctified as a Urim and Thummim to Joseph.

I don't accept the premise that there could be multiple Urim and Thummim, or indeed multiple temples of God. But that's just me, and I'm not here to hold members of the CoJCoLDS to account for revelations they have received outside of the canon of Scripture accepted by the Christian Church historically. I'm only focusing on those LDS revelations that directly contradict the sacred scriptures.

[Aliwe]

Were the apostles right in casting lots?

No, I think they were stupid for doing that. You get the boys together and hash out the best man to replace Judas using reason. Flipping a coin? Give me a break.

[volgadon]

No, I think they were stupid for doing that. You get the boys together and hash out the best man to replace Judas using reason. Flipping a coin? Give me a break.

Stupid or not, do you believe that they transgressed the law against divination? If they had, where is their condemnation recorded?

[Aliwe]

Stupid or not, do you believe that they transgressed the law against divination? If they had, where is their condemnation recorded?

This brings us back full circle to where I came in on this thread. The Apostles were not wrong to divine the replacement for Judas because they had the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. They had the authority to bind and loose. But before Joseph Smith met Moroni, when he was going around New York State with little colored pieces of glass looking for buried treasure, he did not have authority, and so was in transgression of the law against divination.

[DBMormon]

But before Joseph Smith met Moroni, when he was going around New York State with little colored pieces of glass looking for buried treasure, he did not have authority, and so was in transgression of the law against divination.

Either Joseph never met with moroni or God obviously didn't condemn Joseph for this. You can't have it both ways.

No, I think they were stupid for doing that. You get the boys together and hash out the best man to replace Judas using reason. Flipping a coin? Give me a break.

Not sure how to have a discussion and reason when one dismisses any and all things. I throw in the towel..... you win

You have decided reason trumps revelation and inspiration and god's will.... Even I see no purpose in going further here

Edited June 22, 2012 by DBMormon

[Aliwe]

You have decided reason trumps revelation and inspiration and god's will.... Even I see no purpose in going further here

Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

[Sevenbak]

The Noahide laws cover gentiles and do not prohibit divination. But the Laws of Moses cover Mormons since they profess to have continuity with Judaism. I realize that Jesus, in 3 Nephi, claimed to fulfill the Law of Moses and proposed a new set of laws, but the twenty-eight imperatives he declared (which speak of tithing, and calling the Church in his name, etc) do not restate the moral code at Sinai, against murder, theft, etc. And yet Mormons still profess to obey those precepts, while ignoring the laws against eating shellfish, etc. That means there is a moral law, still in place, and a ceremonial law which has been abrogated. The law against divination is a moral law, not ceremonial. It is always wrong to practice sorceries, not just wrong on New Moons.

I don't accept the premise that there could be multiple Urim and Thummim, or indeed multiple temples of God. But that's just me, and I'm not here to hold members of the CoJCoLDS to account for revelations they have received outside of the canon of Scripture accepted by the Christian Church historically. I'm only focusing on those LDS revelations that directly contradict the sacred scriptures.

For that to be true, you would have to lump Isaiah into that evil mold as well. He ranks diviners with the prophets and judges, elders and honorable men.

"The mighty man and the man of war, The judge and the prophet, And the diviner and the elder; The captain of fifty and the honorable man, The counselor and the skillful artisan, And the expert enchanter." (Isaiah 3:2-3)

While you're at it, you might as well lump God himself into that evil mold. He, with his servants, sits before a giant crystal ball beholding the ways of man. (Revelations 4:4-6)

The bottom line for believing LDS is that God's ways of doing things are counterfeited by the opposition. Always have been, always will be.

[Sevenbak]

No, I think they were stupid for doing that. You get the boys together and hash out the best man to replace Judas using reason. Flipping a coin? Give me a break.

Sorry, that's another thing that I don't accept. It was an accepted practice sanctioned by the Lord in making important decisions that had the Lord's hand in it.

Joshua casted lots before the Lord to divide the land if Israel among the tribes. There are many other examples.

Lev. 16:8; Num. 26:55; 33:54; 34:13; Josh. 13:6; 14:1–2; Judg. 20:9; 1 Sam. 10:20–21; 14:40–42; 1 Chr. 24:5, 31;25:8; 26:13–14; Acts 1:26). Prov. 16:33 expresses a feeling on the subject of the Lord’s hand in the matter.

[Aliwe]

For that to be true, you would have to lump Isaiah into that evil mold as well. He ranks diviners with the prophets and judges, elders and honorable men.

"The mighty man and the man of war, The judge and the prophet, And the diviner and the elder; The captain of fifty and the honorable man, The counselor and the skillful artisan, And the expert enchanter." (Isaiah 3:2-3)

It is very interesting to me, sir, that you would omit the first and fourth verses in that chapter, and cite only verses two and three, which has the effect of negating the sense of the passage; to wit, judgment against Jerusalem rather than praise of various important people. So I would like to reply by citing the passage in full to restore the context.

Isaiah 3:

[1] For, behold, the Lord, the LORD of hosts, doth take away from Jerusalem and from Judah the stay and the staff, the whole stay of bread, and the whole stay of water,

[2] The mighty man, and the man of war, the judge, and the prophet, and the prudent, and the ancient,

[3] The captain of fifty, and the honourable man, and the counseller, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent orator.

[4] And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.

Viewed in context, the "artificer" and "orator" and "man of war" do not seem so great in the eyes of God.

[zerinus]

... and I'm not here to hold members of the CoJCoLDS to account for revelations they have received outside of the canon of Scripture accepted by the Christian Church historically. I'm only focusing on those LDS revelations that directly contradict the sacred scriptures.

Such as?

[zerinus]

No, I think they were stupid for doing that. You get the boys together and hash out the best man to replace Judas using reason. Flipping a coin? Give me a break.

The Apostles were not wrong to divine the replacement for Judas because they had the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. They had the authority to bind and loose.

You are now contradicting yourself. Your second post contradicts the first.

Furthermore, the casting of lot was preceded by prayer and faith. They evidently had the faith to believe that the Lord was able to reveal His mind to them by that means, and it was done according to their faith. I don't think that their "priesthood keys" was relevant here, only in sofar as they were the right people to make that decision. In other words, "priesthood keys" is not a prerequisite for using that means of obtaining revelation where one has the necessary faith to obtain it, and it is pertinent to what one is trying to do.

Edited June 22, 2012 by zerinus

[Calm]

Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Seems to me an essential part of his reasoning was its ability to persuade. Absent persuasion, not much to compare to this verse.

[Aliwe]

You are now contradicting yourself. Your second post contradicts the first.

Aliwe, on 21 June 2012 - 08:41 PM, said:

No, I think they were stupid for doing that. You get the boys together and hash out the best man to replace Judas using reason. Flipping a coin? Give me a break.

Aliwe, on 21 June 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

The Apostles were not wrong to divine the replacement for Judas because they had the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. They had the authority to bind and loose.

I don't think so. The Apostles had permission to divine their replacement, and they did so, but the better thing to do in my mind would be to reason it out. God, after all, went through a lot of trouble making people's brains, and just dialing in for the answer probably comes across to him as laziness.

Furthermore, the casting of lot was preceded by prayer and faith. They evidently had the faith to believe that the Lord was able to reveal His mind to them by that means, and it was done according to their faith. I don't think that their "priesthood keys" was relevant here, only in sofar as they were the right people to make that decision. In other words, "priesthood keys" is not a prerequisite for using that means of obtaining revelation where one has the necessary faith to obtain it, and it is pertinent to what one is trying to do.

I suggested the Priesthood keys were not used to obtain the revelation, but as a Get Out Of Hell Free card so they could cast lots if they wanted to.

[Vance]

I don't think so. The Apostles had permission to divine their replacement, and they did so, but the better thing to do in my mind would be to reason it out. God, after all, went through a lot of trouble making people's brains, and just dialing in for the answer probably comes across to him as laziness.

Interesting that you think you know better than the authorized servants of God.

Isa 55: 8 ¶ For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.

9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Vance

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It is very interesting to me, sir, that you would omit the first and fourth verses in that chapter, and cite only verses two and three, which has the effect of negating the sense of the passage; to wit, judgment against Jerusalem rather than praise of various important people. So I would like to reply by citing the passage in full to restore the context.

Isaiah 3:

[1] For, behold, the Lord, the LORD of hosts, doth take away from Jerusalem and from Judah the stay and the staff, the whole stay of bread, and the whole stay of water,

[2] The mighty man, and the man of war, the judge, and the prophet, and the prudent, and the ancient,

[3] The captain of fifty, and the honourable man, and the counseller, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent orator.

[4] And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.

Viewed in context, the "artificer" and "orator" and "man of war" do not seem so great in the eyes of God.

Sorry I am not sure how you get that interpretation. There is nothing in those "other verses" that suggest what you are peddling.

Are you perhaps as JW? Just curious.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[phaedrus ut]

There is no such thing as magic rocks or divining rods and to pretend that such devices have supernatural powers is insulting. There is no such thing as "seeing", "remote viewing", or "telepathy". We no longer requires supernatural explanations or mythology to explain our knowledge gaps about the sun, stars, or illness. If you happen to have a neighbor who can use a seer stone or has the gift of the rod then there is a 1 million dollar gift waiting for them from the James Randi Foundation.

So for me there is no question of whether or not Joseph could see treasures with his seer stone. The more interesting question to me is whether he knew he couldn't and sold his services anyway or was he just as deluded about his abilities as the people who paid him.

Phaedrus

[Aliwe]

So for me there is no question of whether or not Joseph could see treasures with his seer stone. The more interesting question to me is whether he knew he couldn't and sold his services anyway or was he just as deluded about his abilities as the people who paid him.

I agree there are no magic rocks, but I do not judge Joseph Smith for using them, God alone will judge all. What interests me is when followers of Joseph Smith, today, justify his actions. For mankind is a rationalizing, not rational, animal.

[Vance]

There is no such thing as "seeing", "remote viewing", or "telepathy".

No tele-vision or tele-phone or tele-communication?

Who knew?

We no longer requires supernatural explanations or mythology to explain our knowledge gaps about the sun, stars, or illness.

And because we know how they work, we don't need "supernatural explanations" for the devices mentioned above. But to those that don't know how they work (they don't know the nature of them) then "supernatural explanations" come naturally.

[phaedrus ut]

And because we know how they work, we don't need "supernatural explanations" for the devices mentioned above. But to those that don't know how they work (they don't know the nature of them) then "supernatural explanations" come naturally.

The devices you mention actually exist. Magic rocks and magic powers don't. If such magical items existed they would require testing and explanation.

Phaedrus

[mfbukowski]

You are now contradicting yourself. Your second post contradicts the first.

Dang.

I can't believe I gave YOU a rep point for that one, but I did.

[mfbukowski]

The devices you mention actually exist. Magic rocks and magic powers don't. If such magical items existed they would require testing and explanation.

Phaedrus

You are exactly right, but you are missing the point. The rocks or powers are not "magic", but could be operating through a technology not yet known, or more precisely, defined.

Edited June 22, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

For mankind is a rationalizing, not rational, animal.

I would love to see you clearly define the difference. All our minds do is create order from chaos. We make observations and create linguistic models to explain them. That is essentially what science is

[Vance]

You are exactly right, but you are missing the point. The rocks or powers are not "magic", but could be operating through a technology not yet known, or more precisely, defined.

I think you said THAT better than I could have. Thanks.

[phaedrus ut]

You are exactly right, but you are missing the point. The rocks or powers are not "magic", but could be operating through a technology not yet known

They can't be operating through a technology not yet known because they've never been shown to exist. You're not just speculating how how they work but speculating that if we could prove they exist how they would work. We can speculate about the possible technologies used by the philosophers stone to change base metals into gold or how the Buddhist Cintamani jewel will perform magical wishes but in reality we can't test the powers of any these stones.

Right now scientists are using a colliding protons in a 17 mile loop at a energy of four trillion electron volts to find the elusive Higgs Boson particle hinted to be at 125-6 billion electron volts of mass. Yet will all this knowledge about our physical universe it's worthwhile speculating that seer stones are operating using some yet unknown technology?

Phaedrus