Urim And Thummin

[Benjamin McGuire]

Prior to 1833, the stones packaged with the gold plates were simply called "interpreters". In 1833, Phelps calls them (for the first time in print) the Urim and Thummim. So, any accounts that mention specifically the interpreters, are likely referring to the artifact placed with the gold plates and not to the seer stone. But, any account that says "Urim and Thummim" can refer to either the artifact found with the plates or to the seer stone. And of course references to the (brown) seer stone don't refer to the Nephite artifact.

Ben M.

[thews]

I agree with Brant. The term Urim and Thummim can and has been used to describe the seer stone. My only problem is this. This generation doesn't see it that way, so knowing that when the church uses Urim and Thummim and they use it to mean seer stone that members think they are implicitly implying the spectacles found with the plates, it may be a good time to start saying seer stone in the wording and briefly explaining where he got it and how he used both.

also when the quote says

this in it's context implies that other items were used in the translation and the urim and thummim or spectacles if you assume that is only part of the equation. AKA there were several instraments used in the translation, including the urim and thummim

Also do we have definitive proof the spectacles were not used for any of the current Book of Mormon as we have it. or is that just assumption?

Here's some data on the use of "Urim and Thummim" to describe Joseph Smith's seer stones:

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. In 1830, Oliver Cowdery is reported to have testified in court that these tools enabled Joseph "to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates" (Benton, Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate 2 [Apr. 9, 1831]:15). In an 1891 interview, William Smith indicated that when his brother Joseph used the "interpreters." William described these as being like a silver bow twisted into the shape of a figure eight with two stones between the rims of the bow connected by a rod to a breastplate; his hands were left free to hold the plates. Other late reports mention a variety of further details. EM, Vol.1, BOOK OF MORMON TRANSLATION BY JOSEPH SMITH. See Daniel N. Rolph, "Prophets, Kings, and Swords: the Sword of Laban and Its Possible Pre-Laban Origin," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: vol. 2 no. 1, Spring and Fall, 1993, 73.

Note in the above "these tools" (dated 1830) are followed by the statement "sometimes called by others the Urim and Thimmim".

In footnote 13 it defines the first use of "Urim and Thummim" in 1833 (three years after the Book of Mormon was published).

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]

To summarize, The "Nephite spectacles" were taken back after the lost 116 pages. The use of "Nephite spectacles" are very specific to what was found in the stone box. After Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon using his brown and white seer stones, the term "Urim and Thummim" was used three years afterwards to conflate the two. Regarding your question of proof the spectacles were not used for any of the current Book of Mormon, they couldn't have been, because they were taken back.

D&C 10:1 from LDS.org:

http://www.lds.org/s.../dc/10?lang=eng

Section 10

Revelation given to Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Harmony, Pennsylvania, in the summer of 1828 (see History of the Church, 1:20–23). Herein the Lord informs Joseph of alterations made by wicked men in the 116 manuscript pages from the translation of the book of Lehi, in the Book of Mormon. These manuscript pages had been lost from the possession of Martin Harris, to whom the sheets had been temporarily entrusted. (See the heading to section 3.) The evil design was to await the expected retranslation of the matter covered by the stolen pages and then to discredit the translator by showing discrepancies created by the alterations. That this wicked purpose had been conceived by the evil one and was known to the Lord even while Mormon, the ancient Nephite historian, was making his abridgment of the accumulated plates, is shown in the Book of Mormon (see Words of Mormon 1:3–7).

1–26, Satan stirs up wicked men to oppose the Lord’s work; 27–33, He seeks to destroy the souls of men; 34–52, The gospel is to go to the Lamanites and all nations through the Book of Mormon; 53–63, The Lord will establish his Church and his gospel among men; 64–70, He will gather the repentant into his Church and will save the obedient.

delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the ^bUrim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them.

In the above, "by means of the Urim and Thummim" was added later, though the date reads 1828, or two years before the Book of Mormon was published.

Some data from BYU.edu:

http://rsc.byu.edu/a...et-“-days-yore”

The Urim and Thummim[12] were also “called interpreters. . . . Andwhosoever is commanded to look in them, the same is called a seer”(Mosiah 8:13). They were a gift given to many of the Lord’s servants,such as Abraham (see Abraham 3:1), Noah,[13] Moses and Aaron (seeExodus 28:30),[14] the brother of Jared (see Ether 2:23), and Mosiah (seeMosiah 8:13). Joseph Smith received the Urim and Thummim with the plates for the purpose of translation in 1827 (see Joseph Smith—History 1:59, 62; Ether 3:23, 24, 28).[15] In addition to translation, theUrim and Thummim served as an instrument for Joseph to see with spiritual eyes and receive other revelations and inspiration. The earlyrevelations in the Doctrine and Covenants Joseph received throughthe Urim and Thummim.[16] His mother, Lucy Mack Smith, wrote,“That of which I spoke, which Joseph termed a key, was indeed,nothing more nor less than the Urim and Thummim, and it was bythis that the angel showed him many things which he saw invision.” She continued by saying, “He could ascertain, at any time,the approach of danger, either to himself or the Record, and onaccount of which he always kept the Urim and Thummim about hisperson.”[17] It was through the Urim and Thummim that Josephreceived the command for him and Oliver Cowdery to be baptized,and by this same instrument Joseph was told to write to DavidWhitmer for assistance so he could complete the translation of theplates.[18]

As a seer, Joseph had the privilege of using the Urim andThummim, but he did not always need it. As Joseph developed as theLord’s anointed servant, so did his ability to receive communicationfrom the Lord. Joseph explained in 1831 to Orson Pratt while workingon his inspired translation of the Bible that “the Lord gave himthe Urim and Thummim when he was inexperienced in the Spirit ofinspiration. But now he had advanced so far that he understood theoperations of that Spirit, and did not need the assistance of thatinstrument.”[19] Revelations after section 17 of the Doctrine andCovenants were apparently received without them. President JosephFielding Smith held that the Urim and Thummim were returned withthe plates to the angel and that the Prophet Joseph never used themafter the organization of the Church. Any mention of the Urim andThummim after that was most likely referring to a seer stone thatJoseph was known to possess.[20] On December 27, 1841, Elder WilfordWoodruff and the rest of the Twelve met with the Prophet Joseph.On that date he recorded, “I had the privilege of seeing for the firsttime in my day the Urim and Thummim.”[21] Elder Brigham Young recorded on the same day that Joseph “explained to us the Urim andThummim which he found with the plates” and “he showed us hisseer stone.”[22] For the purposes of our examination, whether thesestatements about the Urim and Thummim refer to the original, anew set of interpreters, or a seer stone doesn’t matter. The fact that the symbolism of the Urim and Thummim stayed connected withthe Prophet Joseph Smith and his role as seer among the early Saintsis what does.

In the above, the argument asserts that the "Urim and Thummim" was returned with the plates. This is then followed by a quote by Elder WilfordWoodruff stating he saw the "Urim and Thummim" dated Dec. 27, 1841.

More from the same article:

Some of Joseph Smith’s closest associates years later continued toview him as having the Urim and Thummim and the seeric gift.Edward Stevenson first met the Prophet in 18, and his family loaned Joseph their copy of Book of Martyrs by John Fox. When Joseph returned it, he stated, “I have, by the aid of the Urim and Thummim, seen those martyrs.”[23] In July of 1843, Joseph and HyrumSmith were discussing the revelation on plural marriage. Hyrum“very urgently requested Joseph to write the revelation by means ofthe Urim and Thummim, but Joseph in reply, said he did not needto, for he knew the revelation perfectly from beginning to end.”[24]After the death of the Prophet Joseph, Elder Heber C. Kimball testifiedthat this divine instrument passed on to the next leader of theChurch: “‘Has brother Brigham Young got the Urim and Thummim?’Yes, he has . . . everything that is necessary for him to receive the willand mind of God to this people. Do I know it? Yes, I know all about it.”[25] Joseph Smith was a seer as in ancient times, and the Urim andThummim was a symbol that testified of the restoration of that rolein this dispensation.

In the above, Hyrum Smith uses "Urim and Thummim" in 1843.

The "Nephite spectacles" were taken back with the lost 116 pages and Joseph Smith used his seer stones to translate the Book of Mormon. The conflated use of "Urim and Thummim" is only attached to Joseph Smith's seer stones (which he owned since 1822), which the LDS church still has in its vault. From FairMormon:

http://en.fairmormon...ith/Seer_stones

What happened to the seer stones?

As noted above, the Nephite interpreters were apparently reclaimed by Moroni following the loss of the 116 pages, and were only seen again by the Three Witnesses (Testimony of Three).

Van Wagoner and Walker write: David Whitmer indicated that the seer stone was later given to Oliver Cowdery: "After the translation of the Book of Mormon was finished early in the spring of 1830 before April 6th, Joseph gave the Stone to Oliver Cowdery and told me as well as the rest that he was through with it, and he did not use the Stone anymore.” Whitmer, who was Cowdery's brother-in-law, stated that on Oliver's death in 1848, another brother-in-law, "Phineas Young, a brother of Brigham Young, and an old-time and once intimate friend of the Cowdery family came out from Salt Lake City, and during his visit he contrived to get the stone from its hiding place, through a little deceptive sophistry, extended upon the grief-stricken widow. When he returned to Utah he carried it in triumph to the apostles of Brigham Young's 'lion house.'"...

[Van Wagoner and Walker here confuse the two seer stones, so this section is not included here, given that better information has since come to light.] ...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."^[36] (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.^[37])

Joseph's second (white) stone is also in the possession of the LDS First Presidency.^[38]

To summarize all of the above, the "Nephite spectacles" and "Urim and Thummim" is an incorrect conflation, as they are not the same thing. Joseph Smith's seer stones (the brown and white ones) are called (after the Book of Mormon translation) the "Urim and Thummim" and the LDS church still has them. Hope this clears things up.

Edited July 8, 2012 by thews

[why me]

Here's some data on the use of "Urim and Thummim" to describe Joseph Smith's seer stones:

http://www.boap.org/...1c3history.html

Note in the above "these tools" (dated 1830) are followed by the statement "sometimes called by others the Urim and Thimmim".

In footnote 13 it defines the first use of "Urim and Thummim" in 1833 (three years after the Book of Mormon was poubllished).

To summarize, The "Nephite spectacles" were taken back after the lost 116 pages. The use of "Nephite spectacles" are very specific to what was found in the stone box. After Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon using his brown and white seer stones, the term "Urim and Thummim" was used three years afterwards to conflate the two. Regarding your question of proof the spectacles were not used for any of the current Book of Mormon, they couldn't have been, because they were taken back.

D&C 10:1 from LDS.org:

http://www.lds.org/s.../dc/10?lang=eng

In the above, "by means of the Urim and Thummim" was added later, though the date reads 1828, or two years before the Book of Mormon was published.

Some data from BYU.edu:

http://rsc.byu.edu/a...et-“-days-yore”

In the above, the argument asserts that the "Urim and Thummim" was returned with the plates. This is then followed by a quote by Elder WilfordWoodruff stating he saw the "Urim and Thummim" dated Dec. 27, 1841.

More from the same article:

In the above, Hyrum Smith uses "Urim and Thummim" in 1843.

The "Nephite spectacles" were taken back with the lost 116 pages and Joseph Smith used his seer stones to translate the Book of Mormon. The conflated use of "Urim and Thummim" is only attached to Joseph Smith's seer stones (which he owned since 1822), which the LDS church still has in its vault. From FairMormon:

http://en.fairmormon...ith/Seer_stones

To summarize all of the above, the "Nephite spectacles" and "Urim and Thummim" is an incorrect conflation, as they are not the same thing. Joseph Smith's seer stones (the brown and white ones) are called (after the Book of Mormon translation) the "Urim and Thummim" and the LDS church still has them. Hope this clears things up.

Not for me. I just know that the church claims that something special was used in the translation. The artist depiction that one usually sees the critics moaning about is not exactly spot on. But this has nothing to do with the lds church which claims something special happened with the urim and thummin. Members should know that the translation process was not so simple and rather complicated.

[Bernard Gui]

From the Temple Institute in Jerusalem:

http://www.templeins..._garments-8.htm

Only Questions of Congregational Importance

The process of questioning for Divine aid with the Urim V'Tummim' was done in the following manner: When a question arose whose implications were so consequential that the entire congregation of Israel would be effected-such as, for example, the question of whether or not to go out to war - then, the King of Israel (or the commanding officer of the army) would ask his question before the High Priest. An ordinary person, or someone not representing the entire community would not ask of the urim v'tummim.

The High Priest stands facing the Ark of the Testimony, and the questioner stands behind him, facing the priest's back. The questioner does not speak out loud, neither does he merely think the question in his heart; he poses his query quietly, to himself - like someone who prayers quietly before his Creator. For example, he will ask "Shall I go out to battle, or shall I not go out?"

A Meditative Experience and a Prophetic Revelation

The High Priest is immediately enveloped by the spirit of Divine inspiration. He gazes at the breastplate, and by meditating upon the holy names of G-d, the priest was able to receive the answer through a prophetic vision-the letters on the stones of the breastplate, which would shine forth in his eyes in a special manner, spelling out the answer to the question. The priest then informs the questioner of the answer.

Flavius Josephus writes (Antiquities 3:8:9) that the stones also shone brilliantly when Israel went forth into battle. This was considered as an auspicious sign for their victory.

Another midrashic passage indicates that when the tribes of Israel found favor in G-d's eyes, each respective stone shone brilliantly. But when particular members of any one tribe were involved in a transgression, that tribe's stone would appear tarnished and dimmed. The High Priest would see this phenomena and understand its cause. He would then cast lots within the rank of this tribe, until the guilty person was revealed and judged (Midrash HaGadol).

Edited July 7, 2012 by Bernard Gui

[why me]

From the Temple Institute in Jerusalem:

http://www.templeins..._garments-8.htm

This should be pinned to every exmormon site and to this site. Thanks.

[theplains]

But it shouldn't be embarrassing at all. In fact, it should be faith promoting. Good advice for anyone would be: stick your head in a hat and attempt to write a book of over 500 pages while your head is in the hat and see how you do.

Why do you think the church does not accurately depict all the ways Joseph was said to have translated the plates?

Why would they need to be embarrassed and omit it from the current Gospel Principles (for example) if the "hat incident"

really happened?

Thanks,

Jim

[why me]

Why do you think the church does not accurately depict all the ways Joseph was said to have translated the plates?

Why would they need to be embarrassed and omit it from the current Gospel Principles (for example) if the "hat incident"

really happened?

Thanks,

Jim

You can tell me why. I see nothing wrong with Joseph putting his head in a hat. Of course, emma and david said that he did this. Others said the process happened differently. If I remember correctly, an ensign article many years ago had an article about it.

[Deborah]

Why do you think the church does not accurately depict all the ways Joseph was said to have translated the plates?

Why do you think it matters?

Furthermore it's not the "church" which depicts how the plates were translated, it's artists renditions. The church has had talks and articles through the years on the different methods.

[Calm]

The Gospel Principles is a very basic text. It sticks to presenting basic concepts one way and does not explore in detail. Most (all) SS and Seminary manuals are this way for a reason. You want more detail, there is more success with the Institute manuals, but even there still kind of basic.

The Church publishes these manuals for the entire worldwide congregations, which means you are going to have a huge variation of teachers. Keeping it simple makes the manuals work for the most inexperienced teacher while allowing for the Spirit and for expansion (which is allowed) makes it work for more experienced teachers that have personal knowledge that can be added to lesson material.

[Deborah]

This after all is what matters about the translation:

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1995/04/the-translation-miracle-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

[ERayR]

Here's the best test of the situation.

For the Book of Mormon translation (after the loss of the 116 pages), there are three options for the translation devices:

1. 100% Urim and Thummim (meaning, the two stones in silver bows and breastplate that were recovered with the plates)

2. 100% seer stone (the rock Joseph possessed before his recovery of the plates)

3. Some combination of the two.

Using sources only from the Church website (including CES sources), please make an argument for which method was used.

To get you started, here are the Ensign articles that specifically mention the "Face in a Hat" method of translation:

http://library.lds.o...d testament.htm

http://www.lds.org/e...nd-power-of-god

If your going to give choices include all of them and an all of the above. All of the above but more importantly through the gift and power of God.

[Deborah]

It is also interesting to note that Joseph Smith himself wasn't specific about the method. He described it as the "gift and power of God." Most accounts of how he translated are second or third hand, which may be why the "Church" isn't specific about it either.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Deborah

[ERayR]

Why do you think the church does not accurately depict all the ways Joseph was said to have translated the plates?

Why would they need to be embarrassed and omit it from the current Gospel Principles (for example) if the "hat incident"

really happened?

Thanks,

Jim

Why do you gravitate to the nefarious reasons options? Why do you think the method depicted wasn't one of the ways?

[Deborah]

Joseph does make this statement "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 breast plate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.” (History of the Church, 4:537)

It isn't specific however on how that medium was used and accounts indicate that he later did not need any assistance to translate.

[Ron Beron]

What if the plates were found today and it was announced that they were being translated by use of a computer? None of us would have occasion to doubt this method nor would we have doubted when Champollion translated the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Equally, we have no problem with Joseph of Egypt looking in a silver cup, nor ancient high priests divining by stones shining and dimming, yet we are concerned by the methodology employed by JS when he uses methods at his disposal prevalent in the time he lived. The bottom line is not the artifact used in divining the will of God, but the actual person being in the same harmonics with God's will. Studies done by the neurosciences have found that modes of meditation significantly alter brainwave patterns so that they showed altered states of consciousness. (Antoine Lutz, Heleen A. Slagter, John D. Dunne & Richard J. Davidson (2008). "Attention regulation and monitoring in meditation". Trends in Cognitive Sciences 12 (4): 163–169.). The common element in all prophetic encounters is an altered state of consciousness ostensibly allowing one to sense something beyond their natural consciousness. Therefore, stones, cups, tea leaves, crystal balls, etc., mean the same. Without the will being altered there is no way to God.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Ron Beron

[Calm]

It is also interesting to note that Joseph Smith himself wasn't specific about the method. He described it as the "gift and power of God." Most accounts of how he translated are second or third hand, which may be why the "Church" isn't specific about it either.

Considering the institute manual recognizes the same thing, I am thinking there is a good chance you are correct.

Little is known about the actual process of translating the record, primarily because those who knew the most about the translation, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, said the least about it. Moreover, Martin Harris, David Whitmer, and Emma Smith, who assisted Joseph, left no contemporary descriptions. The sketchy accounts they recorded much later in life were often contradictory.

The Prophet was reluctant to give the details about the translation. In a Church conference held 25–26 October 1831 in Orange, Ohio, Hyrum requested that a firsthand account of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon be given. But the Prophet said, “It was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.”16 Joseph explained in an open letter to a newspaper editor in 1833 the heart of the matter, but he gave few particulars, stating that the Book of Mormon was “found through the ministration of an holy angel, and translated into our own language by the gift and power of God.”17 His explanation is consistent with the Doctrine and Covenants, which says that he was granted “power to translate through the mercy of God, by the power of God, the Book of Mormon” (D&C 1:29) and that the Lord “gave him power from on high, by the means which were before prepared, to translate the Book of Mormon” (D&C 20:.

Clearly the most important feature of the translation, as the title page of the Book of Mormon states, is “the interpretation thereof by the gift of God.”

https://si.lds.org/bc/seminary/content/library/manuals/institute-student/church-history-in-the-fulness-of-times-student-manual_eng.pdf

[Calm]

Joseph does make this statement "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 breast plate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.” (History of the Church, 4:537)

It isn't specific however on how that medium was used and accounts indicate that he later did not need any assistance to translate.

And Oliver said this:

“These were days never to be forgotten—to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven. . . . Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated, with the Urim and Thummim . . . the history, or record, called ‘The Book of Mormon.’”

https://si.lds.org/bc/seminary/content/library/manuals/institute-student/church-history-in-the-fulness-of-times-student-manual_eng.pdf

[Calm]

Equally, we have no problem with Joseph of Egypt looking in a silver cup, nor ancient high priests divining by stones shining and dimming,

Well, some people do.

[Robert F. Smith]

From the Temple Institute in Jerusalem:

http://www.templeins..._garments-8.htm

In fact, biblical scholars know nearly nothing about the Urim & Thummim. They don't know what they looked like nor how they functioned. There are plenty of theories about that, but no real agreement or strong evidence.

[Robert F. Smith]

Considering the institute manual recognizes the same thing, I am thinking there is a good chance you are correct.

https://si.lds.org/b...-manual_eng.pdf

Humans don't always deal as well with abstraction as they do with concrete description. Saying that Joseph translated by the gift and power of God just doesn't do it for everyone. They are naturally curious about the mechanics. If Joseph had in his hat a solid state electronic device with a miniature LED screen, who nowadays would balk at that? Could God use such devices? Or is He too old-fashioned to be high tech? Isn't it rather we who are backward and primitive?

The Church manuals will naturally tend to equivocate because there simply is not enough information available to determine how the translation was accomplished. Yet, in a day when Church leaders feel comfortable joking from the pulpit about their hand-held electronic devices being "urim & thummim" we ought to be a little more broad minded about such matters.

[Calm]

The Church manuals will naturally tend to equivocate because there simply is not enough information available to determine how the translation was accomplished. Yet, in a day when Church leaders feel comfortable joking from the pulpit about their hand-held electronic devices being "urim & thummim" we ought to be a little more broad minded about such matters.

I would agree.

[ERayR]

Humans don't always deal as well with abstraction as they do with concrete description. Saying that Joseph translated by the gift and power of God just doesn't do it for everyone. They are naturally curious about the mechanics. If Joseph had in his hat a solid state electronic device with a miniature LED screen, who nowadays would balk at that? Could God use such devices? Or is He too old-fashioned to be high tech? Isn't it rather we who are backward and primitive?

The Church manuals will naturally tend to equivocate because there simply is not enough information available to determine how the translation was accomplished. Yet, in a day when Church leaders feel comfortable joking from the pulpit about their hand-held electronic devices being "urim & thummim" we ought to be a little more broad minded about such matters.

I'm OK with that being a description of a urim and thumim'. Now if I could just figure out where the batteries were.

[Robert F. Smith]

Anteojito, post 6, said:

Additionaly, I think the church still does not like to portray Joesph using either. If you go to the church's Joseph Smith web site http://www.josephsmi...&vgnextfmt=tab3

All the depictions show him translating without the aid of anything

Why do you think the church does not accurately depict all the ways Joseph was said to have translated the plates?

Why would they need to be embarrassed and omit it from the current Gospel Principles (for example) if the "hat incident"

really happened?

Thanks,

Jim

I notice that several posts on this thread personify the Church, which is a fallacy. The Church does not depict or get embarrassed. It doesn't have likes and dislikes. Those are things that real people do, and those assigned to write about or illustrate such matters (or to choose artistic illustrations) often know very little about the details (as is the case with the artists who set out to depict early Scriptural or early LDS Church events).

It would be helpful if writers and illustrators would consult with scholars more often. Back in the 1950s, for example, Professor George Ernest Wright of Harvard got together with an excellent artist working for National Geographic magazine, and they collaborated on a couple of issues in which Wright wrote about biblical events, and the artist rendered them in accord with what archeology had discovered by the mid-20th century (the sorts of artifacts, tents, weapons, and clothing used at the time). I thought it very informative and helpful, and National Geographic continues to present wonderful photos and illustrations to accompany their articles.

I have noticed that those assigned to deal with early Church history in film and in manuals are now more likely to utilize historical data and more likely to examine artifacts in Museums, and they need to be encouraged to continue to do that. More photos and illustrations in manuals would be very helpful.

The people in the BYU or Church structure who perform these tasks approach them with particular points of view and certain types of preparation. In that respect they are very much like the rest of us. Sometimes they reach out for help and request data or a reading list. Sometimes they ask for recommended illustrations. Having been on the receiving end of such a request, I know that those responding go all out to provide the best information available. After that it is the responsibility of the writers, and of the General Authorities who review their work-product to decide whether it passes muster. These are all very human endeavors, and one expects that they will be performed with the influence and aid of the Holy Spirit.

[Bernard Gui]

In fact, biblical scholars know nearly nothing about the Urim & Thummim. They don't know what they looked like nor how they functioned. There are plenty of theories about that, but no real agreement or strong evidence.

The purpose of the Temple Institute is to prepare for the construction of the temple in Jerusalem. It's interesting to see their reconstructions of temple clothing and instruments.

Bernard

[Ron Beron]

In fact, biblical scholars know nearly nothing about the Urim & Thummim. They don't know what they looked like nor how they functioned. There are plenty of theories about that, but no real agreement or strong evidence.

Two questions...

1. If the actual descriptions and usage of the UT were not well understood how could JS identify them so readily? Was he using his best guess or just extrapolating from his current mental watershed of the time?

2. Why does the Church continue to try and explain them when the evidence is so sketchy?