Does The Seerstone Give You Heartburn?

[Bernard Gui]

If so, consider this description of how the Urim V'Tummim supposedly was used by the Jewish High Priests....for the full discussion, see [url="https://www.templeinstitute.org/beged/priestly_garments-8.htm

"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.

"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).

"What is the meaning of the words "urim v'tummim?"

According to the commentary of the famed Rashi, these words are derived from their Hebrew roots for "lights" and "perfections," since through the urim v'tummim, the question is illuminated through the letters and its subject matter is then perfected by the High Priest. The Talmud (BT Yoma 73:B) also indicates that the message which was received was called tummim, "perfect," because it was immutable."

Edited August 9, 2015 by Bernard Gui

[The Nehor]

Six threads at once on the same topic give me heartburn.

[Senator]

Well, It's just that it appears that the use of seer stones turns out to be completely unnecessary.

[Kenngo1969]

I dunno.  Never tried to eat a seerstone.  Lemme get back to you on that.  Now, just in case, where did I put those TUMS ?

Edited August 9, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[bluebell]

Well, It's just that it appears that the use of seer stones turns out to be completely unnecessary.

Can we really make that claim though?

Jesus healed people's blindness with just a touch of his hands, yet once he also used spit and mud.

Was He doing something that was completely unnecessary that time? Or is it more likely that He had a reason and we just don't know what it was exactly?

[cinepro]

I think the problem is that, for some reason, we are much more comfortable reading about ancient "religious practices" in the Bible than we are with the idea of Joseph Smith, the Prophet of the Restoration, using frontier folk-magic. 

 

Maybe now that the Church is being more open about it, members will get used to it and it will be incorporated into our beliefs about what is normal and what isn't, but that will make us a little less like the rest of the world in that regard.

 

For instance, here's a question to ask yourself (if you are LDS).  Do you consider the Seer Stone to be sacred?  Do you hold it in the same respect that you hold the Temple, or the Temple Garments?  If someone makes a joke about it, does it offend you like when someone makes a joke about something you hold sacred? 

 

Would you bear testimony of the power of the Seer Stone?

 

Or do you look at it as a purely historical artifact?

 

Because if the Seer Stone is really what Joseph Smith said it was, it is an extremely sacred and powerful religious object.

[carbon dioxide]

I have known from my childhood that Joseph Smith used a device to translate the Book of Mormon.  Does it really matter if he used this stone over something else?  Does one suppose that God can only use one type of object and not another?  Does one suppose that unless he actually used the OT Urim and Thummin or the Nephite interpreters than the translation could not occur?  To me the use of this stone shows that the power is not in the object itself but God.  God can use any object to accomplish his desires.  Therefore do no put faith or honor in any particular object but God.  If God wants to use a used milk carton to accomplish some task, it can be done. 

Edited August 9, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[bluebell]

I think I would have to know more about the stone before deciding if it was sacred or not.

Like, was it imbued with power for a time and to accomplish a specific purpose, after which the power was removed, or was it imbued with power at its conception.

Is its power a result of what it inherently was created to be, or is it just a rock that was once powerful for a set amount of time.

I'm assuming either way that the power comes from God of course.

[CA Steve]

I have been running an informal poll among members. I have a picture of the stone and the Ensign article on my phone which I have shown to about a dozen people. Not one knew what it was from the photo. Some knew that Joseph had used seer/peep stones in addition to the U & T, but none of them knew that the stone he used to translate was anything other than what he removed from the box with the plates, though some were aware that he used a hat with the stone. No one was aware that the Church had possession of the brown seer stone or any other stone.

 

I did not sense that anyone was particularly uncomfortable with finding out about the brown stone, at most what I saw were puzzled looks when reading the Ensign article portions about placing the stone in the hat.

[ALarson]

I have been running an informal poll among members. I have a picture of the stone and the Ensign article on my phone which I have shown to about a dozen people. Not one knew what it was from the photo. Some knew that Joseph had used seer/peep stones in addition to the U & T, but none of them knew that the stone he used to translate was anything other than what he removed from the box with the plates, though some were aware that he used a hat with the stone. No one was aware that the Church had possession of the brown seer stone or any other stone.

 

I did not sense that anyone was particularly uncomfortable with finding out about the brown stone, at most what I saw were puzzled looks when reading the Ensign article portions about placing the stone in the hat.

I have found this too with discussing it some ward members.  Most had not ever heard of Joseph using a seer stone (except in what they considered anti-Mormon rumors regarding Joseph using one for treasure seeking).  Now they know that he used this seer stone for both purposes. 

 

Also, they were confused at the mention of Joseph putting the stone into a hat.  I still firmly believe that this confusion could have been avoided with a more detailed description of how Joseph then put his head in the hat too and pulled the brim tightly around his face (and with the inclusion in the article of an accurate depiction of how Joseph actually used the seer stone instead of just republishing all the familiar illustrations).  

 

But at least this is progress and I think it's great that the church is releasing more and more information about church history.  Members will do further research on their own to answer their questions and clear up any confusion which is good too.  This is also a good opportunity to make sure members have read the essay from the leaders about the translation of the Book of Mormon.

Edited August 9, 2015 by ALarson

[Glenn101]

   I have never had any heartburn about the seer stone. I was under the impression for a long time that he had used the Nephite Interpreters for the entire translation, but was not disturbed when I read about the use of the Seer Stone. I had already had a personal conviction,/revelation,/spiritual experience of the Book of Mormon, that is was translated by the :gift and power of God."

   What we do not have, that I know of, is any records indicating how Joseph came to know that he could use the stone for the translating purpose. We also do not really know what Joseph used while Oliver Cowdery was the scribe. I do not recall where, but I remember reading that the bows were two far apart and the breastplate was two large for Joseph to employ comfortably in the translation process and the seer stone was used for convenience.

   We do not know at what point in the process that any type of interpreter was needed in the translation process.

   I do get acid reflux occasionally because of a hiatal hernia, but no heartburn from the seer stone.

 

Glenn

[Sevenbak]

Heartburn, no. When Oliver tried to translate with the rod his bosum burned, is that close enough?

[Kenngo1969]

To worry unduly about how The Book of Mormon came forth is to miss the point entirely.  If Joseph Smith dictated all or part of the book while standing on his head, rubbing his tummy counterclockwise, and clucking like a chicken, ergo, what?  I could bear my own testimony of the book: some of the most powerful experiences of my life have been centered around it.  But that, alas, would violate board rules.  So I'll let Elder Holland do it for me; that, I do not believe, would be verboten:

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2009/10/safety-for-the-soul?lang=eng

[longview]

Joseph Smith - History (part of our scriptural canon):

 56 In the year 1823 my father’s family met with a great affliction by the death of my eldest brother, Alvin. In the month of October, 1825, I hired with an old gentleman by the name of Josiah Stoal, who lived in Chenango county, State of New York. He had heard something of a silver mine having been opened by the Spaniards in Harmony, Susquehanna county, State of Pennsylvania; and had, previous to my hiring to him, been digging, in order, if possible, to discover the mine. After I went to live with him, he took me, with the rest of his hands, to dig for the silver mine, at which I continued to work for nearly a month, without success in our undertaking, and finally I prevailed with the old gentleman to cease digging after it. Hence arose the very prevalent story of my having been a money-digger.

 

This verse brings up several questions.

How did JS and Stoal hear about each other?

Did Stoal desire JS to make an inquiry using the stone for finding the location of the mine?

 

Apparently JS was NOT successful because he became one of the laborers digging around to locate the mine.  I can believe that JS did not always get "immediate" answers, whether through prayers or looking at peeping stones.  He did not know either way.  Maybe JS felt it was inappropriate to use the sacred stone for obtaining treasure.  It was ambiguous.  President Kimball and others also had the same struggles and wrestlings of the spirit.

 

The Book of Moses "translation" process was NOT done in one fell swoop.  We know that he had at least two drafts.  It was an on going process of "inspired revisions" with new increments.   After JS' martyrdom, the latest draft was left with Emma and the eventual RLDS church.  There are interesting information in the RLDS draft such as the ages of Adam and Methuselah, both having lived 999 years and 6 months (for in the DAY that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die - Gen. 2:16–17.).  The LDS draft (our current Book of Moses) does not have that correction.

[ALarson]

 

How did JS and Stoal hear about each other?

This account tells how they met and, if accurate, how Josiah Stowell heard Joseph telling the stories about his treasure seeking abilities:

 

From the Story of Afton by Carton J. H.Hayes (1882-1964):

In the late summer of 1825, Josiah Stowell, a prosperous elderly farmer of

the pioneer family living two miles below the village, journey to Palmyra,

New York, to visit a cousin (Simpson Stowell). Through the latter, Josiah

met a tall, strapping 19-year old youth named Joseph Smith, Junior, and

became fascinated by his stories about a "seer stone" with which he could

detect buried treasured. Josiah was quite sure that money must be hidden in

hills along the Susquehanna -- he had been told that great quantities of it

had been buried there by fleeing "Spaniards" -- and young Joseph seemed to

be just the person to spot it. So in November 1825 Josiah took Junior back

home with him and the Senior Joe Smith, a roving character, went along for

the ride. They traveled a little out of their way in order that Stowell

might exhibit his promising Smiths to his good friend, Isaac Hale, who lived

at Harmony (presently Oakland) just over the Pennsylvania border. After

trying out Junior with no financial success, Hale became suspicious and

contemptuous of him. On the other hand, Junior was quite smitten by Hale's

21-year old daughter, Emma. He must have felt he had found an authentic

treasure in her.

While the elder Smith returned to Palmyra, the younger, retaining the

confidence of Stowell, went on with him to his home in South Bainbridge.

Here during the winter of 1825-26, Joe did farm chores for a monthly wage of

$14 with room and board. He attended district school and spent leisure time

digging for treasure in hill and gully and riding down the Susquehanna to

see Emma Hale.

In March 1826 Peter Bridgman, a neighbor of Stowell's, member of another

pioneer family, and stern Presbyterian, swore out a warrant for the arrest

of young Smith for being "a disorderly person and an impostor." The trial

was held before Justice of the peace Neely, and though Joe was found guilty,

there is no record of any penalty having been imposed. He continued to enjoy

the favor of Josiah Stowell and the disfavor of Emma Hale's father. At

length, in January 1827, he and Emma eloped and were married by "Squire"

Thomas Tarbell, a justice of the peace in south Bainbridge, in the house

that until recently stood on the present Fair Grounds on the East side.  ( http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/NYCHENAN/2004-11/1101667024 )

[Bernard Gui]

Wow. All these comments, and no mention of the way the essay describes how the words appeared in the stones of the UvT....precisely the way Joseph's seer stone was described as functioning. Makes me think no one actually read the article.

Edited August 10, 2015 by Bernard Gui

[longview]

This account tells how they met and, if accurate, how Josiah Stowell heard Joseph telling the stories about his treasure seeking abilities:

Hayes' account does NOT seem credible at all, too much chit chat.  Probably written early 1900's.  From Ancestry.com without sourcing, lacking provenance.   The JS History is more matter of fact.

[why me]

I have found this too with discussing it some ward members.  Most had not ever heard of Joseph using a seer stone (except in what they considered anti-Mormon rumors regarding Joseph using one for treasure seeking).  Now they know that he used this seer stone for both purposes. 

 

Also, they were confused at the mention of Joseph putting the stone into a hat.  I still firmly believe that this confusion could have been avoided with a more detailed description of how Joseph then put his head in the hat too and pulled the brim tightly around his face (and with the inclusion in the article of an accurate depiction of how Joseph actually used the seer stone instead of just republishing all the familiar illustrations).  

 

 

The best thing to do is to give them a copy of these articles in the ensign. It will show them that the church has mentioned it in the past and was not hiding it. I find that this method works well and does not have a faith crisis in it. Here are the articles written years ago:

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1977/09/by-the-gift-and-power-of-god?lang=eng

 

The above has the head in the hat translation process. This works well with members. They can read it from a church magazine.

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1994/06/highlights-in-the-prophets-life?lang=eng

 

The above has Joseph using a seer stone to find treasure.

 

https://www.lds.org/friend/1974/09/a-peaceful-heart?lang=eng

 

The above article was for children.

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1988/01/a-new-prophet-and-a-new-scripture-the-coming-forth-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

 

From the last link we have this:

After returning from a trip to Palmyra to settle his affairs, Martin began to transcribe. From April 12 to June 14, Joseph translated while Martin wrote, with only a curtain between them. On occasion they took breaks from the arduous task, sometimes going to the river and throwing stones. Once Martin found a rock closely resembling the seerstone Joseph sometimes used in place of the interpreters and substituted it without the Prophet’s knowledge. When the translation resumed, Joseph paused for a long time and then exclaimed, “Martin, what is the matter, all is as dark as Egypt.” Martin then confessed that he wished to “stop the mouths of fools” who told him that the Prophet memorized sentences and merely repeated them.²⁷

 

I can find numerous ensign articles were the seerstone is mentioned. And yet, we still have people telling us that the church hid such a narrative. Even Bushman forgot about the past ensign articles because in his interview with the Trib he states otherwise. I guess I was just lucky to remember their mentioning in church periodicals. Try these articles with the members.

 

Since I have known about the seer stones from some of the above articles, I never had heartburn. However, dealing with critics on such boards as this, has given me some heartburn.

Edited August 11, 2015 by why me

[KevinG]

One lesson from this is how poorly church members are doing at reading church publications.  I'd be worried if I were in the church publishing office.

 

[ALarson]

The best thing to do is to give them a copy of these articles in the ensign. It will show them that the church has mentioned it in the past and was not hiding it. I find that this method works well and does not have a faith crisis in it. Here are the articles written years ago:

 

I can find numerous ensign articles were the seerstone is mentioned. And yet, we still have people telling us that the church hid such a narrative

I agree with what Nevo posted on the other thread regarding your numerous posts about ALL the published articles mentioning the seer stone:

 

 

This is a terrible apologetic argument and I wish people would stop using it. Paul Malan got it right:

 

Quote

Sure, there are a handful of official documents that mentioned the face-in-the-hat technique, but these are isolated needles buried within haystacks that have been carefully arranged by Church gatekeepers.

 

Needle: 150 words from a 38-year-old article in an official Church magazine.

Haystack: 150 years of sermons, art, film production, and culture that celebrate a striking, blue-eyed demigod reading from gold plates the way a third-grader reads Harry Potter. (Which is to say, not with a rock in a hat.)

Plot twist: You don’t even know there is a needle to look for until someone blames you for not finding it.

 

https://medium.com/@...et-dc236fb81723

 

[Gray]

One lesson from this is how poorly church members are doing at reading church publications.  I'd be worried if I were in the church publishing office.

 

 

I don't know about that. Missing a couple of random articles over the course of 40 years isn't an indication that people are slacking off in some way. 

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Doesn't bother me a bit. In fact, I am glad about it. I welcome a return to a Gospel of miracles where angels regularly visit, and rocks help a young prophet translate ancient scripture that have been buried for centuries, and where babies speak and prophecy when buildings are dedicated. I want that, I desire that. The business meetings, that we call "church", are losing their appeal for me.

Perhaps, Bro. Monson should invest in a top hat and see what the LORD might show him? If not, perhaps he could loan it to Bro. Larsen of the Remnant Church and see if the LORD has something to share through him?

Edited August 11, 2015 by BookofMormonLuvr

[snowflake]

   I have never had any heartburn about the seer stone. I was under the impression for a long time that he had used the Nephite Interpreters for the entire translation, but was not disturbed when I read about the use of the Seer Stone. I had already had a personal conviction,/revelation,/spiritual experience of the Book of Mormon, that is was translated by the :gift and power of God."

   What we do not have, that I know of, is any records indicating how Joseph came to know that he could use the stone for the translating purpose. We also do not really know what Joseph used while Oliver Cowdery was the scribe. I do not recall where, but I remember reading that the bows were two far apart and the breastplate was two large for Joseph to employ comfortably in the translation process and the seer stone was used for convenience.

   We do not know at what point in the process that any type of interpreter was needed in the translation process.

   I do get acid reflux occasionally because of a hiatal hernia, but no heartburn from the seer stone.

 

Glenn

The more I studied this issue the more questions I had.  After much investigation I came to the conclusion that no "plates" were used in the "translation", no "nephi interpreters" were used and no "breastplate" were used.  

 

The entire BOM came from the stone, am I correct in saying this?

[KevinG]

I don't know about that. Missing a couple of random articles over the course of 40 years isn't an indication that people are slacking off in some way. 

 

How many average members do you suppose have read the new articles on line?  How many have read the last conference issue of the Ensign.

 

Honestly I think we can sometimes blame ourselves for not knowing things that have been provided.  I remember our Institute teacher in the early 90s begging us to attend classes and utilize the institute materials.  

 

Then again we're a pretty busy people and for years diapers were more important in my home than detailed study.

[KevinG]

The more I studied this issue the more questions I had.  After much investigation I came to the conclusion that no "plates" were used in the "translation", no "nephi interpreters" were used and no "breastplate" were used.  

 

The entire BOM came from the stone, am I correct in saying this?

 

I'm getting the impression that the stone was used primarily after the manuscript pages were lost...  however I'm not comfortable saying the other artifacts were not used simply because they were not reported on.  The details are still pretty mixed from the various reports.  Being a sacred subject to Joseph and his companions there might be much missing from any written record of the times.

 

Suffice it to say we know the stone was used, and a variety of witnesses testified to this fact.