Kind of cool this morning

[rongo]

We finished the Book of Mormon in family study last week, and are reading D&C. This morning, while reading section 3, we had an extended discussion about the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. My oldest three kids know about them, but this was new for my 6th grader. He'd never heard about that, or rock in a hat, etc. before. He wanted to know more, but the older two and I had to run to school. I'm on FHE lesson on Monday, so I think I'll talk about translation method. The seminal B.H. Roberts articles in the Improvement Era that ruffled some feathers are pretty important, and I wish were better known (translation process not a mechanical, automatic process). I think we'll also look at stuff like that. 

It was just neat to be able to talk about the neat things that some people make shipwreck of their faith over. 

[DispensatorMysteriorum]

We had a ward fireside over this on Sunday evening. About 70 members present. Included slide show with pictures of seer stone, depictions of Joseph Smith translating with the hat, etc. 

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

We finished the Book of Mormon in family study last week, and are reading D&C. This morning, while reading section 3, we had an extended discussion about the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. My oldest three kids know about them, but this was new for my 6th grader. He'd never heard about that, or rock in a hat, etc. before. He wanted to know more, but the older two and I had to run to school. I'm on FHE lesson on Monday, so I think I'll talk about translation method. The seminal B.H. Roberts articles in the Improvement Era that ruffled some feathers are pretty important, and I wish were better known (translation process not a mechanical, automatic process). I think we'll also look at stuff like that. 

It was just neat to be able to talk about the neat things that some people make shipwreck of their faith over. 

What a difference this would have made in my life at the age of 10.

[HappyJackWagon]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

We finished the Book of Mormon in family study last week, and are reading D&C. This morning, while reading section 3, we had an extended discussion about the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. My oldest three kids know about them, but this was new for my 6th grader. He'd never heard about that, or rock in a hat, etc. before. He wanted to know more, but the older two and I had to run to school. I'm on FHE lesson on Monday, so I think I'll talk about translation method. The seminal B.H. Roberts articles in the Improvement Era that ruffled some feathers are pretty important, and I wish were better known (translation process not a mechanical, automatic process). I think we'll also look at stuff like that. 

It was just neat to be able to talk about the neat things that some people make shipwreck of their faith over. 

Sounds like a great discussion to have with the family. I'm glad it went well.

However your final line seems a bit condescending.

[rongo]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Sounds like a great discussion to have with the family. I'm glad it went well.

However your final line seems a bit condescending.

Not condescending, but I guess I can see why it could come across that way. It sounds like an action, like ramming the ship into the rocks. I think in many cases, people who lose their belief don't seek to do that, and have it come upon them not really willingly. 

It's an expression from the apostle Paul. 

Edited February 28, 2018 by rongo

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, DispensatorMysteriorum said:

http://strongreasons.wordpress.com

Strong stuff.

[Garden Girl]

3 hours ago, Jeanne said:

What a difference this would have made in my life at the age of 10.

Hello Jeanne...

I notice that you respond this way often, and don't doubt it... but what's wrong with starting again now... seeking out positive scholarly papers, or books and articles by LDS authors and leaders such have been mentioned, and through serious study and prayer try to rebuild your faith and find your testimony again...  You make it sound like there's no starting again.   After 35 years of being inactive, I did go back to square one and started all over again... and here I am today and have been since 1995.  I absolutely understand that everyone is different, including their life path, and what worked for me may not work for others... but I encourage you to consider the possibility.  I wish you well...

GG

Edited March 1, 2018 by Garden Girl

[CA Steve]

6 hours ago, rongo said:

We finished the Book of Mormon in family study last week, and are reading D&C. This morning, while reading section 3, we had an extended discussion about the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. My oldest three kids know about them, but this was new for my 6th grader. He'd never heard about that, or rock in a hat, etc. before. He wanted to know more, but the older two and I had to run to school. I'm on FHE lesson on Monday, so I think I'll talk about translation method. The seminal B.H. Roberts articles in the Improvement Era that ruffled some feathers are pretty important, and I wish were better known (translation process not a mechanical, automatic process). I think we'll also look at stuff like that. 

It was just neat to be able to talk about the neat things that some people make shipwreck of their faith over. 

So growing up I always got in trouble for asking the wrong question. It's a habit I don't seem to have outgrown. When I first heard about the seer stones and the fact that the Church still has one (2?) the first thing that popped into my mind is:

Does/has any of the leadership use[d] them? If so what was the result? If not, why not?

So when I have asked that question before, I usually supplied my own guess which is:

No, they don't because we don't have the right hat.

[Jeanne]

40 minutes ago, Garden Girl said:

Hello Jeanne...

I notice that you respond this way often, and don't doubt it... but what's wrong with starting again now... seeking out positive scholarly papers, or books and articles by LDS authors and leaders such have been mentioned, and through serious study and prayer try to rebuild your faith and find your testimony again...  You make it sound like there's no starting again.   After 35 years of being inactive, I did go back to square one and started all over again... and here I am today and have been since 1995.  I absolutely understand that everyone is different, including their life path, and what worked for me may not work for others... but I encourage you to consider the possibility.  I wish you well...

GG

Nothing wrong with starting now..and I am listening..prayer is my connection still..I am very grateful for your kindness and concern.  You and I have so much in common.  Would love to sit down with you some day in your beautiful state.  Thank you..I am not lost..I hold many good things from my former religion.  Knowing that you care is one of the essential things about mormonism that is sincere and loving from those who hold the Savior close to their lives.  I listen...and don't tell anybody...I am not dead yet..time is not always on my side..but why I am here is because of women like you..and trying to understand.  Thank you...!

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 hours ago, CA Steve said:

So growing up I always got in trouble for asking the wrong question.

People should never get into trouble for asking sincere questions. One of my Young Men from some years ago has parents who, when he would ask a tough question, would get mad at him and tell him never to ask such a thing again. Needless to say, this didn't work for him, and I'm glad that he would come to me with those questions too. I'm even more glad that he grew up to serve a faithful mission and is now serving as an adviser to one of the Aaronic Priesthood quorums in our ward.

Quote

Does/has any of the leadership use[d] them? If so what was the result? If not, why not?

I've shared this story before, but I'll repeat it. Kenneth Godfrey was one of my Institute teachers when I was studying in America, and he told us once about attempting to locate a document from Church archives. He was told that Pres Harold B. Lee had taken that particular document and had not yet returned it, and the person serving him rang up Pres Lee's office to see if Bro Godfrey could get it. He was told, much to his surprise, that he should stop by to take it.

Soon he was in Pres Lee's office, and the prophet said that he would need to get this document out of the First Presidency's vault. Bro Godfrey was invited to go along with him, and he said he remembered feeling excited that he was going to be in 'The Vault'.

It took Pres Lee some time to locate the requested document, and in the meantime, Bro Godfrey was quickly scanning every shelf to see if he could see anything of note. His eyes kept returning to a brown paper bag, with the top rolled down. He told us it looked like someone's lunch.

Feeling emboldened, he asked Pres Lee what was kept in the shopping bag. The prophet said, to the best of my memory, 'Oh, I keep one of the seer stones in there. It makes it easier to carry it between here and home'.

Bro Godfrey said he never could figure out if Pres Lee was telling him the truth or having him on ... or which possibility he found more delightful.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[rongo]

12 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

People should never get into trouble for asking sincere questions. One of my Young Men from some years ago has parents who, when he would ask a tough question, would get mad at him and tell him never to ask such a thing again. Needless to say, this didn't work for him, and I'm glad that he would come to me with those questions too. I'm even more glad that he grew up to serve a faithful mission and is now serving as an adviser to one of the Aaronic Priesthood quorums in our ward.

That is a travesty. I had a young man who had moved into our ward from Kentucky come in once seeking to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood. I asked him if he was planning on serving a mission, and he said no, so I asked him why he wanted the Melchizedek Priesthood. He gave a profound and insightful explanation, and demonstrated a level of scholarship and thoughtfulness about the scriptures and the priesthood that blew me away. He was light years ahead of his peers. I asked him why he didn't want to serve a mission, and he said he couldn't go because he had some heterodox views. When I asked about them, they were open questions that are unsettled and not barriers at all (limited foreknowledge, Jesus not being the only savior in the universe, etc.). I told him that I believe these things, too, and that while some good LDS believe differently on them, they are unsettled open questions and by no means a disqualifier for a mission. His knowledge and grasp of sections 84 and 107 were deep and astonishing.

It's sad, but some of our deep-thinking youth inexplicably think that they are bad or that something is wrong with them. And that should not be.

Bro Godfrey said he never could figure out if Pres Lee was telling him the truth or having him on ... or which possibility he found more delightful.

That is awesome! I agree --- it is cool if he were using the seer stone, but it is also cool if he was able to joke about it in a self-deprecating way. 

[hope_for_things]

20 hours ago, rongo said:

We finished the Book of Mormon in family study last week, and are reading D&C. This morning, while reading section 3, we had an extended discussion about the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. My oldest three kids know about them, but this was new for my 6th grader. He'd never heard about that, or rock in a hat, etc. before. He wanted to know more, but the older two and I had to run to school. I'm on FHE lesson on Monday, so I think I'll talk about translation method. The seminal B.H. Roberts articles in the Improvement Era that ruffled some feathers are pretty important, and I wish were better known (translation process not a mechanical, automatic process). I think we'll also look at stuff like that. 

It was just neat to be able to talk about the neat things that some people make shipwreck of their faith over. 

Can you explain more how you contextualize the seer stone in the hat for your kids, this particular issue was one of the catalysts for my deeper explorations into church history and a faith crisis.  Do you talk with your kids about Joseph's treasure digging activities, and if so, how do you explain that these same rocks were used to help people seek for treasures that were never found and likely never existed.  

Do you also talk about the folk magic world view that Joseph and others had with respect to divining rods and seer stones and all that goes along with that.  The church's essay doesn't talk about any of the implications of Joseph using a seer stone in a hat, it basically just says that we should replace the idea of the Urim and Thummim as an object prepared by God for Joseph to use in a religious context, with the seer stone in the hat and the assumption that this seer stone is just another object that God prepared for Joseph to use for religious purposes.  The essay never gets into the entire superstitious world view and the history of Joseph's and others in his vicinity that believed in folk magic and everything that goes along with it. 

So for me, this was a huge issue that absolutely changed the kind of faith that I have.  It was a shipwreck moment and I guess I'd like to know what it is about how you discussed this with your family that made it so positive and seemingly a non issue.  

[CA Steve]

13 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Bro Godfrey said he never could figure out if Pres Lee was telling him the truth or having him on ... or which possibility he found more delightful.

Interesting story, but it makes me want to ask how members would react if they knew that current leadership (the prophet I assume it would have to be) were actually using the seer stones today in the same way Joseph is said to have used  them? I mean Rongo shared a story of how in his family, some of his children already knew about how Joseph Smith used them, but how would they react if they heard that President Nelson was looking at them inside a hat and reading words off of them?

[rongo]

55 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Can you explain more how you contextualize the seer stone in the hat for your kids, this particular issue was one of the catalysts for my deeper explorations into church history and a faith crisis.  Do you talk with your kids about Joseph's treasure digging activities, and if so, how do you explain that these same rocks were used to help people seek for treasures that were never found and likely never existed.  

Yes, and yes. In the time that we had, we talked about his use of seer stones, the Sally Chase stone (that was used to repeatedly find the former hidden locations for the plates), and the fact that Josiah Stowell sought out Joseph Smith because of his reputation. We also talked a little about treasure digging, which my little one thought was cool. It wasn't a negative for him.  

Do you also talk about the folk magic world view that Joseph and others had with respect to divining rods and seer stones and all that goes along with that.  The church's essay doesn't talk about any of the implications of Joseph using a seer stone in a hat, it basically just says that we should replace the idea of the Urim and Thummim as an object prepared by God for Joseph to use in a religious context, with the seer stone in the hat and the assumption that this seer stone is just another object that God prepared for Joseph to use for religious purposes.  The essay never gets into the entire superstitious world view and the history of Joseph's and others in his vicinity that believed in folk magic and everything that goes along with it.

Yes. We talked about how the prospect of translating an unknown language in our day would be daunting, and that his milieu and experience prepared him to accept this as possible.

I agree with you about the essays. I take my responsibility as a father seriously to do a better job preparing my family than that.  We will talk about divining rods when we get to Section 8.  The Richard L. Anderson article is really good with that, with journal entries from Heber C. Kimball about his revelation rod.

[rongo]

23 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Interesting story, but it makes me want to ask how members would react if they knew that current leadership (the prophet I assume it would have to be) were actually using the seer stones today in the same way Joseph is said to have used  them?

I took it to be more self-deprecating humor, but it does also open up the possibility that they are being used in our day.

I mean Rongo shared a story of how in his family, some of his children already knew about how Joseph Smith used them, but how would they react if they heard that President Nelson was looking at them inside a hat and reading words off of them?

I think they would think it is neat. I'm going to share how Wilford Woodruff placed the seer stone on the altar when dedicating the Manti temple. I wouldn't assume that men today would place them in a hat. I also don't believe that our recent prophets have used them. I think we would have definitive revelation on gospel essay topics in that case, rather than outsourced anonymous articles written by Paul Reeve, Brian Hales, and John Gee.  

[longview]

My perspective on the stones is that they were merely "stepping stones" (take it as a pun if you like) for Joseph Smith on his way to spiritual maturity.  Once there he no longer needed them or the interpreters.  My only question is:  Are the general authorities capable of that level?  Or do they need to do some serious long drawn out fasting and praying before getting revelations, like Spencer Kimball related in his books?

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Can you explain more how you contextualize the seer stone in the hat for your kids, this particular issue was one of the catalysts for my deeper explorations into church history and a faith crisis. 

I have brought this forward a number of times here because it was helpful to me.

Shining stones in a hat ceased to be even a bump in the road for me when I learned how the Temple Institute of Jerusalem describes the ephod and Urim V’Tummim.

Briefly, to receive revelation in answer to an important question, the high priest gazed on the sacred stones of the ephod. Letters shone forth from it spelling out the answer in his eyes.

If this is accurate, then Joseph was in very good company and his use of a seer stone is not problematic, for me at least. Putting it in a hat would simply make it easier to read in a lighted room and protect it from unauthorized view. Facing the Ark, the high priest turned his back on anyone with him in the temple. 

http://www.templeinstitute.org/beged/priestly_garments-8.htm

Hugh Nibley also cited several ancient cross-cultural stories about shining stones....excerpted by FAIR.

https://www.fairmormon.org/evidences/Source:Nibley:CW06:Ch24:3:The_Brother_of_Jared's_Shining_Stones

 

Edited March 1, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Tacenda]

Rongo, why weren't these stories told in Primary/Sunday School awhile back? If the seerstones are so great, why were leaders embarrassed to share this information instead of masquerading them to be the urim and thummin? 

[rongo]

5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Rongo, why weren't these stories told in Primary/Sunday School awhile back? If the seerstones are so great, why were leaders embarrassed to share this information instead of masquerading them to be the urim and thummin? 

I think because some people in charge thought they were embarrassing or "too weird," and thus the multi-decade whitewash in manuals and in Church art. 

Joseph Fielding McConkie in recent times vigorously denied that he used a seer stone at all. I think a lot of the "you can't handle the truth!" approach to it (was that character named Jeppson in "A Few Good Men?") stems from Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie. B. H. Roberts discussed seer stones extensively in church manuals in the early 1900s.

In hindsight, it would have been better to have never gone through the whitewash era, but we're digging out of it now. My families (extended) have never been in the whitewash era, but the Church at large has (manuals, church magazines, artwork, etc.).

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

I think because some people in charge thought they were embarrassing or "too weird," and thus the multi-decade whitewash in manuals and in Church art. 

Joseph Fielding McConkie in recent times vigorously denied that he used a seer stone at all. I think a lot of the "you can't handle the truth!" approach to it (was that character named Jeppson in "A Few Good Men?") stems from Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie. B. H. Roberts discussed seer stones extensively in church manuals in the early 1900s.

In hindsight, it would have been better to have never gone through the whitewash era, but we're digging out of it now. My families (extended) have never been in the whitewash era, but the Church at large has (manuals, church magazines, artwork, etc.).

I love that you admit it, some members or apologists try to go around actually saying it outright. You are truly a gem, excuse the pun!

[Jeanne]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

I think because some people in charge thought they were embarrassing or "too weird," and thus the multi-decade whitewash in manuals and in Church art. 

Joseph Fielding McConkie in recent times vigorously denied that he used a seer stone at all. I think a lot of the "you can't handle the truth!" approach to it (was that character named Jeppson in "A Few Good Men?") stems from Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie. B. H. Roberts discussed seer stones extensively in church manuals in the early 1900s.

In hindsight, it would have been better to have never gone through the whitewash era, but we're digging out of it now. My families (extended) have never been in the whitewash era, but the Church at large has (manuals, church magazines, artwork, etc.).

Shoot...be ye not ashamed.  This is sad that the truth was so late in being taught  straight out from the beginning.  Why be emTbarrassed or ashamed if any part of the said restoration? 

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Yes, and yes. In the time that we had, we talked about his use of seer stones, the Sally Chase stone (that was used to repeatedly find the former hidden locations for the plates), and the fact that Josiah Stowell sought out Joseph Smith because of his reputation. We also talked a little about treasure digging, which my little one thought was cool. It wasn't a negative for him.  

Yes. We talked about how the prospect of translating an unknown language in our day would be daunting, and that his milieu and experience prepared him to accept this as possible.

I agree with you about the essays. I take my responsibility as a father seriously to do a better job preparing my family than that.  We will talk about divining rods when we get to Section 8.  The Richard L. Anderson article is really good with that, with journal entries from Heber C. Kimball about his revelation rod.

It sounds like you are doing a good job based on what you've described here.  Its hard to know what next steps kids will take when it comes to thinking through the implications of the history.  Will they start to wonder why today nobody uses seer stones anymore, or will that question even occur to them.  

When you cover Heber's divining rod and the way people viewed these objects as having something not just sacred, but also supernatural imbued within the object, how will each individual conceive of what was happening back then, and how that compares to their experience in the world today.   

Personally, I no longer believe in the supernatural, that is something that I lost through my faith journey.  

[hope_for_things]

35 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I have brought this forward a number of times here because it was helpful to me.

Shining stones in a hat ceased to be even a bump in the road for me when I learned how the Temple Institute of Jerusalem describes the ephod and Urim V’Tummim.

Briefly, to receive revelation in answer to an important question, the high priest gazed on the sacred stones of the ephod. Letters shone forth from it spelling out the answer in his eyes.

If this is accurate, then Joseph was in very good company and his use of a seer stone is not problematic, for me at least. Putting it in a hat would simply make it easier to read in a lighted room and protect it from unauthorized view. Facing the Ark, the high priest turned his back on anyone with him in the temple. 

http://www.templeinstitute.org/beged/priestly_garments-8.htm

Hugh Nibley also cited several ancient cross-cultural stories about shining stones....excerpted by FAIR.

https://www.fairmormon.org/evidences/Source:Nibley:CW06:Ch24:3:The_Brother_of_Jared's_Shining_Stones

 

What if a person (me) doesn't believe that there is any supernatural power imbued in stones or an Ark.  The best I can imagine these days is that the person making claims of an influence by an external force, is actually just experiencing something inside their brain, and that they are describing this experience as something other, when in reality it is just a part of their internal brain state.  

Joseph being in good company with the billions of humans throughout history that have imagined experiences of one kind or another, and described these experiences as being communication from a God or from something external to themselves, when in reality they were just experiencing a very natural part of the amazing abilities we've all evolved to experience.  

Oh, and lest anyone think I'm hostile to religion, I'm not, and I don't have a problem using religious language to contextualize this narrative.  I just honestly don't believe in the supernatural these days.  

[hope_for_things]

47 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Rongo, why weren't these stories told in Primary/Sunday School awhile back? If the seerstones are so great, why were leaders embarrassed to share this information instead of masquerading them to be the urim and thummin? 

Its because it is weird.  The vast majority of civilized western cultures don't believe in magical stones and sticks and astrology today.  The fact that Joseph and his contemporaries did believe in these things creates the conundrum.  The church still hasn't figured out how to reconcile the old with the new.  The essays don't tell you how you should be comfortable with seer stones.  We get ideas like comparing a seer stone to an iPhone from the church.  They don't know how to explain it.  

I'll explain it for you.  There was no magic happening at all.  It was all a product of Joseph's imagination.  Now, wrestle with that.  And wrestle with the idea that a man (Joseph Smith) created a religion, the same way that all religions have been created, by a human beings.  And then recognize that we can still find a lot of value from the metaphors of religion ideas without also believing in the supernatural.  To me, this is the path forward with integrity.  But church leaders aren't even close to this path yet. 

[rongo]

42 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Its because it is weird.  The vast majority of civilized western cultures don't believe in magical stones and sticks and astrology today.  The fact that Joseph and his contemporaries did believe in these things creates the conundrum.  The church still hasn't figured out how to reconcile the old with the new.  The essays don't tell you how you should be comfortable with seer stones.  We get ideas like comparing a seer stone to an iPhone from the church.  They don't know how to explain it.  

I agree that the essays don't do a good job of giving a lifeline for people really bothered by those issues. They try to provide "cover," but whistle past a lot of graveyards and ignore lots of elephants in lots of rooms. 

I'll explain it for you.  There was no magic happening at all.  It was all a product of Joseph's imagination.  Now, wrestle with that.  And wrestle with the idea that a man (Joseph Smith) created a religion, the same way that all religions have been created, by a human beings.  And then recognize that we can still find a lot of value from the metaphors of religion ideas without also believing in the supernatural.  To me, this is the path forward with integrity.  But church leaders aren't even close to this path yet.

I don't want to live in a world without magic and the supernatural --- to have a religion based only on metaphor and allegory. I'd rather keep taking the blue pill (or is it the red pill? I haven't seen the Matrix).