Could Joseph Smith Really See Buried Treasure In The Seer Stone?

[jkwilliams]

Always read original sources with Palmer, imo.

So need reference please.

 

I'm not vouching for Palmer. It was just what came up first. Your best bet is to always read original sources, no matter who it is. I would think today's example from Jeff Lindsay should teach us that.

[Brian 2.0]

That's what I don't understand.  Do Church members (who have given the matter any thought) think Joseph was actually seeing real buried treasures in the seer stone, and if so, by what power?  And what does it mean if he was charging people to use this power?

 

And if he wasn't, what does that mean? 

 

One of the biggest eye-rollers in religious history is the fact that L. Ron Hubbard wrote pulp science fiction novels for years before having Scientology and Dianetics revealed to him, at which point he ceased being a science fiction novelist and became a revealer of great truths (many of which sound like something you would read in pulp science fiction novels.)  Some might say that the scifi writing was L. Ron's "preparatory period"; obviously he needed good writing skills to be able to have Dianetics revealed to him.  But others see something a little less...supernatural.

 

That's the biggest problem with Joseph Smith and the seer stone.  After we get past the issue of whether or not he was actually seeing treasure, we have to reframe the origin stories of the Church away from Joseph Smith being a simple, uneducated Christian farm-boy who was visited by an angel out of the blue on September 23, 1823. 

 

Sure, this is a path that has been well trod in the past few decades, but the recent publications of the seer stone pictures certainly make it an interesting journey again (this time in full color), and there may be many more people on the path this time.

 

This is a great post and I'm quoting it here just to bring it up again.

 

This topic is really interesting because there seems to be "issues" with every answer.  I can't think of nice easy way out, they always prompt a difficult new question.

 

So what are the options:

 

1)  Joseph didn't see anything in the stone and it was fraud.  

----> So then why couldn't the BOM the same type of fraud?

 

2)  Joseph thought he saw something in the stone or actually saw something in the stone, but it didn't correlate to reality.  There was no treasure in the location he thought there was.

----> So then why couldn't the BOM be the same thing (i.e. it doesn't correlate to reality of there being a Nephite and Lamanite civilizations in the Americas)

 

3)  Joseph did see something in the stone and it did correlate to reality, but the treasure did "slip away."

----> By what power of gift was this done by?  And is it ok to charge for it?

 

What are the other options?  Which of these do you believe?

 

And I know the actual is answer is "we don't know what he saw",  but that's somewhat beside the point when ALL the options of what he did or didn't see seem troubling?

[carbon dioxide]

If it is true that Joseph could see a buried treasure with the seer stone, that might explain the possibility of Joseph Smith being able to translate the plates without the plates being right in front of him. 

[Robert F. Smith]

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

In the case of Joseph I think the term has evolved and as he took on a religious role, I think he and others encouraged the story line that highlighted the religious use of the stone and downplayed its magical use.

As they say, perception is everything.  However, among scholars it is generally agreed that one cannot differentiate magic and religion.

[Robert F. Smith]

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

 

Nothing to see here folks, move along.  

Yeh, nobody here but us droids.  May the Force be with you.

[mfbukowski]

Yeh, nobody here but us droids. May the Force be with you.

Lol!

[cinepro]

At the very least, the next time you hear about the men trying to steal the plates from Joseph, it makes it more interesting to think that these may have been his former treasure hunting team, convinced that Joseph had reneged on his agreement to share any found treasure with them.

 

The Church for so long has presented the whole treasure hunting - seer stone aspect of Joseph's life as an interesting curiosity - a footnote hardly worth mentioning.  But if all the info becomes well known, we may discover that it is instead spread thickly like peanut butter across the entire span of Joseph Smith's story during the 1820's.

[bcuzbcuz]

I have not seen anyone endorse this.

 

This is called a "dis-cuss-ion".   You know- talking about stuff.   You actually have to read it to know what is being said.

Sorry!!! I didn´t realize that my simply asking "Why" someone would do something would be considered intrusive. But go ahead. Have your "dis-cuss-ion". I´ll butt out.

[mfbukowski]

As they say, perception is everything.  However, among scholars it is generally agreed that one cannot differentiate magic and religion.

Not to mention "the placebo effect"

 

Pick your favorite term and show your favorite prejudices!

[CA Steve]

As they say, perception is everything.  However, among scholars it is generally agreed that one cannot differentiate magic and religion.

That may be so but I think for those of us who are not scholars, we think there is a difference. For example, I suspect that comparing priesthood power to magic use would not be received well among many faithful priesthood holders, so regardless of whether or not scholars are able to define a difference, for the purposes of the conversation here and going on in within the church, I think there is. Also, in my opinion, we can see  change to the narrative (Oliver's sprout, the evolution of the seer stone into another  U&T) that even early on Joseph and others were concerned with the appearances of magic vs religion. So while maybe scholars are unable to define a difference between them, it looks like that is exactly what has been and is going on by everyone else.

[CV75]

Do you believe that Joseph Smith could actually look into the seer stone and see actual "coin deposits" and gold mines* located in the American Northeast?

I don’t think so. He may have thought he could, he may have thought he did, he may have been driven by the same motives he was warned against in JS-H 1:46. Verse 33 he says that “God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.” The wise do not allow that to detract from the fundamental principles of our religion and its appendages.

[Calm]

A dowsing rod to find graves? I just have to ask. Why?

What happens if a headstone is matched to the wrong grave?

Does anyone here know if dowsing can identify the occupant of a grave? I found a site on line where the dowser claimed to identify age and gender of persons in unmarked graves, but again, Why?

Aren´t these rather strange goings on for TBMs?

You haven't been around die hard genealogy buffs much, have you? if they could afford ground penetrating radar or whatever those are called, I am sure many would be out doing that. The most enthusiastic ones I've met are nonLDS. They would be all for digging up unmarked graves and DNA testing them.

I assume the purpose on that occasion was to hopefully align what was on the map/plat which identified the graves' occupants with graves that had lost their marker or never had one due to the speed with which they were buried and then the family moved on, couldn't afford a long lasting marker, etc. It could have been drawn as if flat but wasn't or other things affected the accuracy.

[mfbukowski]

That may be so but I think for those of us who are not scholars, we think there is a difference. For example, I suspect that comparing priesthood power to magic use would not be received well among many faithful priesthood holders, so regardless of whether or not scholars are able to define a difference, for the purposes of the conversation here and going on in within the church, I think there is. Also, in my opinion, we can see  change to the narrative (Oliver's sprout, the evolution of the seer stone into another  U&T) that even early on Joseph and others were concerned with the appearances of magic vs religion. So while maybe scholars are unable to define a difference between them, it looks like that is exactly what has been and is going on by everyone else.

Well the problem is that one man's magic and delusion is another man's true faith, regardless of what believers in any given religion will tell you.

 

The appearances of Mary at Fatima are very well documented and seen by thousands at once, and all I hear from LDS is either crickets or the certain belief that somehow it was all due to Satan.

 

For Catholics, Joseph was either a fraud or the visions were also "of Satan".

 

So if there is to be a middle ground vocabulary so that real interfaith discussion can take place, it is the interfaith scholars which must establish it.

 

In fact it might be interesting to start a thread here on Fatima and see how that shakes out.

 

As early as July 1917 it was claimed that the Virgin Mary had promised a miracle for the last of her apparitions on October 13, so that all would believe. What happened then became known as the "Miracle of the Sun". A huge crowd, variously estimated between 30,000 and 100,000,^[9] including newspaper reporters and photographers, gathered at the Cova da Iria. The incessant rain had ceased and there was a thin layer of cloud. Lúcia, seeing light rising from the lady's hands and the sun appearing as a silver disk, called out "look at the sun". She later had no memory of saying this.^[6] Witnesses later spoke of the sun appearing to change colors and rotate like a wheel.^[10] Witnesses gave widely varying descriptions of the "sun's dance". Poet Afonso Lopes Vieira and schoolteacher Delfina Lopes (with her students and other witnesses in the town of Alburita), reported that the solar phenomenon was visible up to forty kilometers away.^[10]

Columnist Avelino de Almeida of O Século (Portugal's most influential newspaper, which was pro-government in policy and avowedly anti-clerical),^[6] reported the following: "Before the astonished eyes of the crowd, whose aspect was biblical as they stood bare-headed, eagerly searching the sky, the sun trembled, made sudden incredible movements outside all cosmic laws - the sun 'danced' according to the typical expression of the people."^[11] Eye specialist Dr. Domingos Pinto Coelho, writing for the newspaper Ordem reported "The sun, at one moment surrounded with scarlet flame, at another aureoled in yellow and deep purple, seemed to be in an exceeding fast and whirling movement, at times appearing to be loosened from the sky and to be approaching the earth, strongly radiating heat".^[12] The special reporter for the October 17, 1917 edition of the Lisbon daily, O Dia, reported the following, "...the silver sun, enveloped in the same gauzy purple light was seen to whirl and turn in the circle of broken clouds...The light turned a beautiful blue, as if it had come through the stained-glass windows of a cathedral, and spread itself over the people who knelt with outstretched hands...people wept and prayed with uncovered heads, in the presence of a miracle they had awaited. The seconds seemed like hours, so vivid were they."^[13]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_F%C3%A1tima

[Gervin]

If it is true that Joseph could see a buried treasure with the seer stone, that might explain the possibility of Joseph Smith being able to translate the plates without the plates being right in front of him. 

I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

And if it's true that Joseph couldn't see a buried treasure with the seer stone, that might explain the possibility of Joseph Smith being able to "translate" the plates without the plates being right in front of him.

[Brian 2.0]

If it is true that Joseph could see a buried treasure with the seer stone, that might explain the possibility of Joseph Smith being able to translate the plates without the plates being right in front of him. 

 

 

I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

And if it's true that Joseph couldn't see a buried treasure with the seer stone, that might explain the possibility of Joseph Smith being able to "translate" the plates without the plates being right in front of him.

 

 

wait... what?  So both options explain the possibility?  Both options are evidence in favor?

[Calm]

Gervin's solution means JS is a fraud.

[Robert F. Smith]

At the very least, the next time you hear about the men trying to steal the plates from Joseph, it makes it more interesting to think that these may have been his former treasure hunting team, convinced that Joseph had reneged on his agreement to share any found treasure with them.

 

The Church for so long has presented the whole treasure hunting - seer stone aspect of Joseph's life as an interesting curiosity - a footnote hardly worth mentioning.  But if all the info becomes well known, we may discover that it is instead spread thickly like peanut butter across the entire span of Joseph Smith's story during the 1820's.

And going back to the Wood Scrape Affair in 1800 (Ludlum, Social Ferment in Vermont, 238-244, online at  http://olivercowdery.com/gathering/Newisrael.htm#ludlum ), and well beyond that.  Indeed, all concerned generally underestimate the depth and breadth of such matters.

 

Mormon scholars have long been upfront about all such matters, but who pays attention to them?

[Robert F. Smith]

That may be so but I think for those of us who are not scholars, we think there is a difference. For example, I suspect that comparing priesthood power to magic use would not be received well among many faithful priesthood holders, so regardless of whether or not scholars are able to define a difference, for the purposes of the conversation here and going on in within the church, I think there is. Also, in my opinion, we can see  change to the narrative (Oliver's sprout, the evolution of the seer stone into another  U&T) that even early on Joseph and others were concerned with the appearances of magic vs religion. So while maybe scholars are unable to define a difference between them, it looks like that is exactly what has been and is going on by everyone else.

Well, of course, Steve, but that all begs the question.  After all, it isn't that the scholars are "unable to define a difference between" magic and religion (as you put it), but rather that magic and religion cannot be differentiated -- even though careless parties think that they are very easily differentiated.  That is the nub of the problem, and it is something which historians and scholars of religion have long had to come to grips with:  Why is it that virtually all religions are indistinguishable from magic?

 

There are indeed a lot of ordinary folks who believe that magic & religion are very different, until they carefully evaluate their premises and the actual function of religion in real life.  Then it slowly but surely becomes apparent that any religious cult (official or otherwise) is indistinguishable from magic, including the formulaic prayers and liturgies, the ultimate objectives, authority, the supernatural, etc.  As they say in Rebecca Frankl and Philip Stein, Anthropology of Religion, Magic, and Witchcraft (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2005), 161,  

 

“Magic gives us control and divination gives us knowledge—two of the major functions of religion. Magic deals with supernatural forces and thus is a religious phenomenon.”

[Robert F. Smith]

Well the problem is that one man's magic and delusion is another man's true faith, regardless of what believers in any given religion will tell you.

 

The appearances of Mary at Fatima are very well documented and seen by thousands at once, and all I hear from LDS is either crickets or the certain belief that somehow it was all due to Satan.

 

For Catholics, Joseph was either a fraud or the visions were also "of Satan".

 

So if there is to be a middle ground vocabulary so that real interfaith discussion can take place, it is the interfaith scholars which must establish it.

 

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

The Catholic scholars I've heard speak to this issue, merely observe that Mormons and Catholics have in common a deep belief in continuing revelation.

[mfbukowski]

The Catholic scholars I've heard speak to this issue, merely observe that Mormons and Catholics have in common a deep belief in continuing revelation.

Oh yes of course and I should have qualified that.  We saw that last week with "Brother Webb" who gave such a magnificent talk.

 

I was talking about the usual yahoos one runs into on the message boards on Catholic Answers (an incredible misnomer!) and other such boards.  Of course they have a closed canon but certainly are deeply aware of the miraculous and the value of mysticism in becoming closer to Christ.

[mfbukowski]

What are the other options?  Which of these do you believe?

 

And I know the actual is answer is "we don't know what he saw",  but that's somewhat beside the point when ALL the options of what he did or didn't see seem troubling?

Only to some, kind sir!  I don't think you would think there is an objective way to answer your question is there?

 

How do I know you are in love with your wife?   Do I care?  If you were a religious teacher I would prove your doctrine in practice, not by mind reading what "really happened" when that is unknowable.

 

Imagine you were teaching about loving your wife and lied about you loving your own wife.   That would not matter to me at all if what you taught was changing my life

Edited August 15, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Brian 2.0]

Only to some, kind sir! I don't think you would think there is an objective way to answer your question is there?

How do I know you are in love with your wife? Do I care? If you were a religious teacher I would prove your doctrine in practice, not by mind reading what "really happened" when that is unknowable.

Imagine you were teaching about loving your wife and lied about you loving your own wife. That would not matter to me at all if what you taught was changing my life

Of course. But you need to remember, Mark, that you are a more advanced and evolved Mormon than most.

[mfbukowski]

Of course. But you need to remember, Mark, that you are a more advanced and evolved Mormon than most.

LOL tell that to my wife! 

[bcuzbcuz]

You haven't been around die hard genealogy buffs much, have you? if they could afford ground penetrating radar or whatever those are called, I am sure many would be out doing that. The most enthusiastic ones I've met are nonLDS. They would be all for digging up unmarked graves and DNA testing them.

I assume the purpose on that occasion was to hopefully align what was on the map/plat which identified the graves' occupants with graves that had lost their marker or never had one due to the speed with which they were buried and then the family moved on, couldn't afford a long lasting marker, etc. It could have been drawn as if flat but wasn't or other things affected the accuracy.

No, you´re right. I haven´t been around "die hard genealogy buffs" who link up graves to names. ---but if someone uses ground penetrating radar they only note skeleton and gravestone without trying to link one to the other. I just don´t see how dowsing adds anything to the picture. Admittedly, I see dowsing as being akin to gazing into a crystal ball.

But why is identifying the right body for the right grave important?

[Calm]

I read some family members' gravestones when my dad was buried next to his parents this last December. I have to admit there was some emotion stirred in me when I thought of this ground under my feet as being the final mortal residence of the bodies of people I had only read about before. It is not really much of a connection in my mind (the elements of our body at death are not the ones I believe we will be resurrected with) but I think it can be a significant one for some people if it even moved me a bit. A memorial with just their name on it with who knows where the body is wouldn't give me the same feeling, I assume it is the same for others.

It would be the difference for people in seeing a father's name on the Vietnam memorial wall and visiting where he was buried. Both significant, but different. Having a specific physical location to refer to I think adds to a sense of connection in a very insecure situation.

In Asia people go and talk to and celebrate with the remains of their loved ones as well as having ancestor shrines. It seems significant there that they know the remains of what were the physical vehicle for that person is in front of them.

Edited August 16, 2015 by calmoriah