Does The Seer Stone Cause Problems For Other Bom Apologetics?

[The Unclean Deacon]

peep stones, treasure digging, buried heads in hats, etc...  we sure are a peculiar people

[JLHPROF]

peep stones, treasure digging, buried heads in hats, etc...  we sure are a peculiar people

 

As we should be.

[stemelbow]

Wouldn't it create a new problem if Moroni gave false/incorrect instructions because he didn't know God could use many devices. Wouldn't this call into question any angelic vision Jospeh had? If I can't count on an angel providing clear information from God it seems like trying to discern the will of God would be futile.

I don't see that as a problem at all. We're all a little off on some things. Moroni would be no different. he too could have been mistaken. Not only is that not really a problem, in my book, it seems logical that Moroni was wrong about something.

[HappyJackWagon]

I don't see that as a problem at all. We're all a little off on some things. Moroni would be no different. he too could have been mistaken. Not only is that not really a problem, in my book, it seems logical that Moroni was wrong about something.

If God's messenger angel was wrong about instructions to Joseph then that requires we question every angelic visitation and spiritual event. I'm fine if that's what you're saying. I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Because to the average member that would create a HUGE problem.

 

 

Happyjackwagon;  It seems the confusion over the translation begins with Joseph's own, inaccurate story. Does this false narrative in Joseph's own words cause apologists any problems with regard to Joseph's credibility on other truth claims?

 

 

Russell McGregor; What's the matter, Happy Jack? Couldn't you load that question any more heavily?

 

I wasn't intending to load it. I was only trying to be accurate.

The church's current narrative is different than Joseph's version of the translation story as found in the JSH in the PoGP. Sorry if you find that offensive.

[stemelbow]

If God's messenger angel was wrong about instructions to Joseph then that requires we question every angelic visitation and spiritual event. I'm fine if that's what you're saying. I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Because to the average member that would create a HUGE problem.

Sure. it can be a problem to some, but I just can't see it as a problem. I see it as expected. That's just the nature of who we are. So I imagine that's the nature of who Moroni is too.

[Robert F. Smith]

Has anyone addressed the issue of Moroni's visitations to Joseph, describing the plates and the Urim & Thummim and their use in translation. Moroni visited 3 times that night, sharing the same information. The U&T was described as having been prepared for the purpose of translation.

 

Later in the Joseph Smith History in the PoGP Joseph continues to talk about "translating". Without mention of the seer stone being used in translation wouldn't the natural assumption be that JS translated using the UT and plates as described in the JSH?

 

It seems the confusion over the translation begins with Joseph's own, inaccurate story. Does this false narrative in Joseph's own words cause apologists any problems with regard to Joseph's credibility on other truth claims?

 

Joseph Smith History-

 

35 Also, that there were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim—deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted “seers” in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them for the purpose oftranslating the book.

 

 

62 By this timely aid was I enabled to reach the place of my destination in Pennsylvania; and immediately after my arrival there I commenced copying the characters off the plates. I copied a considerable number of them, and by means of the Urim and Thummim I translated some of them, which I did between the time I arrived at the house of my wife’s father, in the month of December, and the February following.

One of your main problems here is lack of control of terminology. You are quoting from Joseph Smith's official history which he had his scribes compiling from about 1838 onward.  In those very late accounts, which eventually show up as the History of the Church edited by B. H. Roberts, and part of which is canonized as Joseph Smith's History (JS H) in the Pearl of Great Price, we find the insertion of terms such as Urim & Thummim, a term never used by Moroni at all, and by Joseph only in the mid-1830s at the earliest.  The Book of Mormon refers to interpreters and directors, and Joseph and his early contemporaries also refer to a seer stone(s) in his possession.  If we want to speak precisely, Joseph never had the Urim & Thummim, an exclusively Israelite instrument, though he and his contemporaries clearly regarded the  term synonymous with interpreters and seer stone(s).  The hoi polloi may indeed be confused.  The specialists are not.

[HappyJackWagon]

  If we want to speak precisely, Joseph never had the Urim & Thummim, an exclusively Israelite instrument, though he and his contemporaries clearly regarded the  term synonymous with interpreters and seer stone(s).  The hoi polloi may indeed be confused.  The specialists are not.

Hmmm. While I may agree with you I don't think the church would agree that JS never had the U&T (Except for his seer stone). Are you suggesting that the entire story of the U&T (nephite interpreters) is fabricated or are you merely making a distinction between "THE" Urim & Thummim and "A" Urim & Thummim.

[Robert F. Smith]

Hmmm. While I may agree with you I don't think the church would agree that JS never had the U&T (Except for his seer stone). Are you suggesting that the entire story of the U&T (nephite interpreters) is fabricated or are you merely making a distinction between "THE" Urim & Thummim and "A" Urim & Thummim.

As I said, the Urim & Thummim were an exclusively Israelite (biblical) instrument, and were never in the possession of the Nephites (they had interpreters), just as the Liahona was never in possession of the Israelites of the Bible.  Joseph Smith had his seerstone as well as the Nephite interpreters.  The instruments are distinct, and no scholar confuses them.  That LDS Church members began to confuse them in the mid-1830s, merely tells us that the terminology is being misused -- just as you continue to misuse it -- as a generic term for any and all holy translation devices of whatever kind (stones or spectacles, from whatever source).

 

When you say you "don't think the church would agree," one has to ask what you think the "church" is:  The Body of Christ (body of believers), officials in the LDS Office Bldg, professors of religion at BYU, the Brethren themselves (now or in yesteryear), etc.  Anthropomorphizing the "church" is probably not a useful exercise, aside from being a fallacy.  The real question is:  Did Hugh Nibley ever misuse such terminology?  Answer: No.  Why would he be so reckless?

[HappyJackWagon]

As I said, the Urim & Thummim were an exclusively Israelite (biblical) instrument, and were never in the possession of the Nephites (they had interpreters), just as the Liahona was never in possession of the Israelites of the Bible.  Joseph Smith had his seerstone as well as the Nephite interpreters.  The instruments are distinct, and no scholar confuses them.  That LDS Church members began to confuse them in the mid-1830s, merely tells us that the terminology is being misused -- just as you continue to misuse it -- as a generic term for any and all holy translation devices of whatever kind (stones or spectacles, from whatever source).

 

When you say you "don't think the church would agree," one has to ask what you think the "church" is:  The Body of Christ (body of believers), officials in the LDS Office Bldg, professors of religion at BYU, the Brethren themselves (now or in yesteryear), etc.  Anthropomorphizing the "church" is probably not a useful exercise, aside from being a fallacy.  The real question is:  Did Hugh Nibley ever misuse such terminology?  Answer: No.  Why would he be so reckless?

I'm not sure if you intended to be incredibly condescending or not but point taken. I am learning not to not accept the institutional church's narrative or language as you suggest.

 

Was there one set of urim & thummim that was passed through generations or did different people possess different urim & thummim's in ancient Israel? If there were only one, I would agree "The" urim & thummim was never possessed by ancient Nephites. However, if there were multiple urim & thummims throughout the generations then U&T is a description or title given to the type of article used for devining. If that is the case then it is possible the nephites possessed "A" urim & thummim. Do you have a source that indicates there was only one U&T throughout history? Or is it possible there were multiple, and therefore the title/name/description could apply in areas outside of ancient Israel?

 

Who do I think the "church" is? While I recognize it could be defined either as leadership or membership as you suggested (NOT as BYU professors including Hugh Nibley), I was using "the church" (quite obviously, I thought) to refer to church leadership which are the authority for the church. It doesn't mean anything to refer to the entire body of members as there will never be any unanimity there so it would be impossible to define.

 

I look forward to hearing more about "The" urim and thummim and a source about that. I readily admit I know much more of the church's false narrative surrounding the U&T than I do ancient Israelite practices.

[ALarson]

In D&C 17:1, it states that the "Urim and Thummim" (the ancient translators which were with the plates) were given to the Brother of Jared "upon the mount".  This verse is speaking to the Three Witnesses:

 

1 Behold, I say unto you, that you must rely upon my word, which if you do with full purpose of heart, you shall have a view of the plates, and also of the breastplate, the sword of Laban, the Urim and Thummim, which were given to the brother of Jared upon the mount, when he talked with the Lord face to face, and the miraculous directors which were given to Lehi while in the wilderness, on the borders of the Red Sea.

 

Edited August 27, 2015 by ALarson

[longview]

In D&C 17:1, it states that the "Urim and Thummim" (the ancient translators which were with the plates) were given to the Brother of Jared "upon the mount".  This verse is speaking to the Three Witnesses:

Amazing!   The WORD of the LORD trumps the word of Robert F. Smith.   

 

I would suppose ANY physical device that enables communication with the spirit realm CAN be classified generically as an U&T.   Therefore:

 

Liahona qualifies as an U&T.

 

Seer Stone, U&T.

 

Interpreters directly identified as Urim&Thummim by the LORD.

 

etc, etc.

Edited August 27, 2015 by longview

[ERayR]

Amazing!   The WORD of the LORD trumps the word of Robert F. Smith.   

 

I would suppose ANY physical device that enables communication with the spirit realm CAN be classified generically as an U&T.   Therefore:

 

Liahona qualifies as an U&T.

 

Seer Stone, U&T.

 

Interpreters directly identified as Urim&Thummim by the LORD.

 

etc, etc.

 

Hey now no politics.

[PeterPear]

In D&C 17:1, it states that the "Urim and Thummim" (the ancient translators which were with the plates) were given to the Brother of Jared "upon the mount". This verse is speaking to the Three Witnesses:

It's certain that Robert F. Smith will have a valid argument about why the Urim and Thummin were strictly an Israelite instrument, such as Joseph Smith learned something new on the subject in the 1840s, as D&C 17 was revealed in 1829.

Just as Brant Gardner's excuses that the words used in the Book of Mormon were revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith according to his weakness in understanding, thus a "horse" is actually a "tapir" or a "deer" or maybe a Central America "howler monkey" (Usumacinta River is named after these monkeys-you know the actual River Sidon) despite the Voice of God declaring to the Three Witnesses who at the same time were gazing upon the Angel Moroni holding the Gold Plates, which voice declared the translation was true and accurate.

As holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood, we should never allow the Voice of God to contradict with a Book of Mormon geography theory. So read up on the excuses for it in the archived words of F.A.R.M.S. at BYU's Maxwell Institute web site.

Edited August 28, 2015 by PeterPear

[Robert F. Smith]

........................................................................................... 

Was there one set of urim & thummim that was passed through generations or did different people possess different urim & thummim's in ancient Israel? If there were only one, I would agree "The" urim & thummim was never possessed by ancient Nephites. However, if there were multiple urim & thummims throughout the generations then U&T is a description or title given to the type of article used for devining. If that is the case then it is possible the nephites possessed "A" urim & thummim. Do you have a source that indicates there was only one U&T throughout history? Or is it possible there were multiple, and therefore the title/name/description could apply in areas outside of ancient Israel?

 

Who do I think the "church" is? While I recognize it could be defined either as leadership or membership as you suggested (NOT as BYU professors including Hugh Nibley), I was using "the church" (quite obviously, I thought) to refer to church leadership which are the authority for the church. It doesn't mean anything to refer to the entire body of members as there will never be any unanimity there so it would be impossible to define.

St Paul defined the Christian Church as the Body of Christ (all the members), and this is the way in which both Catholic and Protestant churches define it, i.e., the body of believers.  This was the way biblical Israel was also defined -- as the Congregation of Israel, all twelve tribes.  Never as the leaders.  This was also the way Brother Brigham defined the Church, not only in D&C 136, but elsewhere, and the Mormons typically considered themselves as the Church -- perhaps best expressed by the United Order.  We are the Saints of the Last Days, none of us less important than the leaders -- who serve us and our Lord.

 

I look forward to hearing more about "The" urim and thummim and a source about that. I readily admit I know much more of the church's false narrative surrounding the U&T than I do ancient Israelite practices.

As to Urim & Thummim, the Anchor Bible Dictionary would be helpful, or the Encyclopedia Judaica. Also you might want to see my entries on this board at http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/64879-use-of-the-urim-and-thummim-in-translating-the-book-of-mormon/ , and http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/65842-why-use-a-seer-stone/ ,

Edited August 28, 2015 by Robert F. Smith

[Russell C McGregor]

I look forward to hearing more about "The" urim and thummim and a source about that. I readily admit I know much more of the church's false narrative surrounding the U&T than I do ancient Israelite practices.

You really are determined to work that "false narrative" slogan of yours into every possible post, aren't you?

[HappyJackWagon]

St Paul defined the Christian Church as the Body of Christ (all the members), and this is the way in which both Catholic and Protestant churches define it, i.e., the body of believers.  This was the way biblical Israel was also defined -- as the Congregation of Israel, all twelve tribes.  Never as the leaders.  This was also the way Brother Brigham defined the Church, not only in D&C 136, but elsewhere, and the Mormons typically considered themselves as the Church -- perhaps best expressed by the United Order.  We are the Saints of the Last Days, none of us less important than the leaders -- who serve us and our Lord.

 

As to Urim & Thummim, the Anchor Bible Dictionary would be helpful, or the Encyclopedia Judaica. Also you might want to see my entries on this board at http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/64879-use-of-the-urim-and-thummim-in-translating-the-book-of-mormon/ , and http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/65842-why-use-a-seer-stone/ ,

As a general membership of the church we have no voice with decision makers at the general level, therefore we do not have the ability to have any real impact among the entire body of the church. We can have impact on our own little congregation/area but that is hardly the same thing as being able to impact policies or challenge false narratives. The prophet is the one person who speaks for the church so I think it is reasonable to refer to church leadership as the voice of the church.

 

Robert, do you have any thoughts about my original question regarding "the" U&T versus "a" U&T?

 

 

Russell McGregor;   "You really are determined to work that "false narrative" slogan of yours into every possible post, aren't you?"

The church has admitted that the term "Urim & Thummim" was used innacurately and didn't enter the narrative until years after it's use. Can you explain why the narrative of Joseph using the U&T (Nephite Interpreters) to translate the BoM is not a false narrative? Maybe you just don't like the term because you think it's negative, but I'm not using it to be negative, just accurate without having to go into great detail every single time about how JS did NOT use the nephite interpreters, commonly referred to as the U&T, to "translate" any portion of the BoM as we have it today.

 

Just because you don't lie a phrase doesn't mean it isn't accurate.

[ALarson]

Robert, what is your opinion regarding Joseph stating that the ancient translators ("Urim and Thummim") were the ones given to the Brother of Jared "upon the mount"? (Post #85 above).

[Robert F. Smith]

As a general membership of the church we have no voice with decision makers at the general level, therefore we do not have the ability to have any real impact among the entire body of the church. We can have impact on our own little congregation/area but that is hardly the same thing as being able to impact policies or challenge false narratives. The prophet is the one person who speaks for the church so I think it is reasonable to refer to church leadership as the voice of the church.

The Prophet does indeed speak for and to the Church.  Like the Pope, who fills the position of Pontifex Maximus and Deputy/Vicar of God on Earth, the  LDS Prophet is President of the High Priesthood of God.  He is also a Seer and Revelator.  He is primus inter pares, first among equals.  But mostly he is just our most important servant, doing the hardest job there is, all on our behalf.  He may indeed be the spokesman for us all, and the spokesman for God, but he can do nothing without our approbation (common consent).  We are all in this together, Brother.  He needs your full support.

 

 

Robert, do you have any thoughts about my original question regarding "the" U&T versus "a" U&T?

 

The church has admitted that the term "Urim & Thummim" was used innacurately and didn't enter the narrative until years after it's use. Can you explain why the narrative of Joseph using the U&T (Nephite Interpreters) to translate the BoM is not a false narrative? Maybe you just don't like the term because you think it's negative, but I'm not using it to be negative, just accurate without having to go into great detail every single time about how JS did NOT use the nephite interpreters, commonly referred to as the U&T, to "translate" any portion of the BoM as we have it today.

 

Just because you don't lie a phrase doesn't mean it isn't accurate.

 

Robert, what is your opinion regarding Joseph stating that the ancient translators ("Urim and Thummim") were the ones given to the Brother of Jared "upon the mount"? (Post #85 above).

My personal likes or dislikes have no impact on the question.  As HappyJack states herewith, "The church has admitted that the term "Urim & Thummim" was used innacurately and didn't enter the narrative until years after it's use."  By saying this, he may be referring to the original form of D&C 17:1, which clearly did not include "Urim & Thummim,"  i.e., the Lord did not use the term in D&C 17.  He is likely referring to the Church's Joseph Smith Papers Project, from which I will insert the following excerpts:

 

http://josephsmithpapers.org/topic/urim-and-thummim (Glossary)

Urim and Thummim 

A device used to translate and receive revelation.1 In the Old Testament, the high priest of Israel used a device by this name to discern God’s will for Israel.2 The Book of Mormon gives an account of an ancient prophet, Mosiah, who translated records into his own language using “interpreters,” or “two stones” attached to “the two rims of a bow.”3 JS later recounted that he found such a device deposited with the gold plates, which he described as “spectacles,” or “two stones in silver bows,” and which he used to translate the plates.4 JS and other church members began referring to the instrument as the Urim and Thummim in 1833.5 The term was also applied to seer stones JS said he used to translate and to receive some of his early revelations.6 In April 1843, JS taught that the earth in its perfected state would become a Urim and Thummim where all things “will be manifest to those who dwell on it” and that those prepared for the celestial kingdom would receive their own Urim and Thummim.7

------------------------------------------------------------  

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/revelation-june-1829-e-dc-17 ,

D&C 17:1,

In this version of the revelation, the use of “Urim and Thummim” (rather than the Book of Mormon term “interpreters” or the term “spectacles,” which JS used in 1829 and 1832) is probably a later redaction since “Urim and Thummim” does not appear in JS’s writings before 1833. The revisions in this section may in part be correcting errors made while copying from a source text that had itself been revised. (See Book of Mormon, 1830 ed., 172–173, 546[Mosiah 8:13; Ether 4:5]; JS History, ca. Summer 1832; and “Joseph Smith Documents Dating through June 1831.”)