What did he use for money digging?You and I are usually on the same page, but I respectively disagree that JS used the Urim and Thummim for money digging.
What did he use for money digging?You and I are usually on the same page, but I respectively disagree that JS used the Urim and Thummim for money digging.
Wow...I genuinely appreciate this post, I may not agree with it, but I appreciate the tone.
I looked for the citation for the Broome County CF, without luck.
Is this your opinion, or do you have a citation? It sounds like something similar to what Bushman wrote, but I will try to find it. What cf would you use to support your view; it is an interesting view.
My opinion is, and I believe a full study of Joseph and money digging shows that the seer stone was a prop or tool for his trade as a money digger. And, that money digging and the "mechanics" of it, not only formed the BoM, but also much of Mormonism.
What did he use for money digging?
Thats a cop out, I could say the same of you. I am not extreme at all; more and more LDS hold the same view as I do on this subject. It is hardly being extreme to tie Josephs worldview and practices of money digging and all that went with it, into the inception of Mormonism. The younger generations see it, and want answers on how to deal with it, but when they get the denials, and the running away from historical facts, that is where the Faith crisis's start. My conversation with Ralf is a perfect example and when they have sites like the JS Foundation denying what is obviously true...does not help the church. Which is what Bushman so rightly said.Well, Markk--if you would drop your extremism--you might receive more of that tone.
I believe all his writing and revelation came 100% from his mind...what changed is how he portrayed his receiving it from the folks. The Money Digging style, the seer stone, did not go well with non-Mormon's. His reputation as a Money Digger is undeniable, and the term is not a favorable one. After his conviction for glass looking, he changed being so open about his ties to the occult and money digging, but inside it was and is still there and the footprint of that is all deep into LDS history and teachings. He also started to bring a Masonic flavor into to the church and his revelations, especially in regard to the Temple ceremonies and endowments.It's my personal view--it seems to be shared by some, from what I read. For sure--Joseph Smith progressed from one point of receiving revelation, to another point--where the props were replaced by his own mind.
For me--that seems to be the potential for all men--where we not only receive the medium to revelation--but become the medium of revelation from God.
There are multiple sources, both anti and non anti...we will get there. We have plenty of time.Please show me the story about the Chase's... where did you get it... your very lacking in showing your sources and I often have to wonder why. Do you have a witness that you can point too or just come off site anti-mormon nonsense
No, it shows a clear influence of Money Digging and Glass Looking in the BoM story. The seer stone is just part of the story.Chuckle, what above proves the point of a seer stone?
Well, you need to first understand what the term Money Digging means and implies, and the stories that go with its history...I guess I need to back track a bit. Money Digging is not just a term, but a profession, a common one in his day...so common that official had to make laws to outlaw it's practice.Joseph Smith - History... what is the point of the reference to any of the above you argued... I read it all as I had in the past, what connection are you trying to make Markk.???? Nothing about he would see in his seer stone. Then you claim he is sustained as a seer which complements (brings to perfection ) the money digging theme... you're joking of course... my goodness how low have you stopped to revise Joseph Smiths History..
You tell me, and along with it a first hand account...and any account by his enemies will be highly suspectWhat did he use for money digging?
You tell me, and along with it a first hand account...hopefully not a account by his enemies... they of course would be suspect... chuckle.
Eagerly waiting for first hand accounts by people who knew him and not his enemies which he had plenty of and are noted below.There are multiple sources, both anti and non anti...we will get there. We have plenty of time.
No, it shows a clear influence of Money Digging and Glass Looking in the BoM story. The seer stone is just part of the story.
Well, you need to first understand what the term Money Digging means and implies, and the stories that go with its history...I guess I need to back track a bit. Money Digging is not just a term, but a profession, a common one in his day...so common that official had to make laws to outlaw it's practice.
I have to run to work, but I will give a more in-depth description of "Money Digging" and why JS was called..." Joe Smith the money digger."
I believe all his writing and revelation came 100% from his mind...
The Money Digging style, the seer stone, did not go well with non-Mormon's.
His reputation as a Money Digger is undeniable,
Do you know that Willard and sally Chase were neighbors, and that Jospeh and other had a money digging company. And that many, including sally and Willard, like Joseph had peep stones also. There was also a struggle between them for the peep stone that Joseph translated the BoM in his hat with.Eagerly waiting for first hand accounts by people who knew him and not his enemies which he had plenty of and are noted below.
Richard Bushman is not a enemy, but more a fool who involved in his research many of those below.
- Known Enemies of Jospeh Smith:
- Willard Chase, Affidavit (1833), and Peter Ingersoll, Affidavit (1833), in MoU 238-9; Tucker, Origin, 19; Abel Chase Interview (1881), and John Stafford, Interview (1881), in EMD, 2:85, 106, 121; Caroline Rockwell Smith, Statement (1885), in EMD, 2:199; BioS, 102, 109. For another Palmyra seer stone, see Wayne Sentinel, Dec. 27, 1825
- Josiah Stowell. Deacon Isaiah Stowell, David Whitmer, Willard Chase and Sally Chase, Hurlbut and Fawn Brodie,
I know, right? It's like he reads only what he wants to see.Whoops!
”Nevertheless, the scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process. Some accounts indicate that Joseph studied the characters on the plates. Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument.The process as described brings to mind a passage from the Book of Mormon that speaks of God preparing “a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light.” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org...cs-essays/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng
Chuckle.
1). scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process.
2). Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone)
3). many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer
stone in a hat.
4). Book of Mormon that speaks of God preparing “a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light.
Are you kidding me Markk, you have noting but admitted different accounts. You have zero, nada,
zippo
There never was an issue.Ralf…the GA admit he used the stone it is no longer and issue.
And so? So what?he used different methods
Strangely enough, we still teach that because that also happened.Straggly enough I was taught that Joesph would place the plates on the table, and there would be a curtain between he an dthe translator, and then he would translate
They were wrapped in a towel.the plates are always be said to be wrapped in a towel.
I don't see what the issue is here. No one saw the plates until the witnesses were called. The idea is that the plates where hidden from view during the entire time Joseph translated them. Of course, they behind a curtain. It is ridiculous to think otherwise. At some point, I'm sure they were divided, translator and scribe, by a curtain, nail in the ceiling or not. That's a relatively insignificant detail to build a case on.Apparently, there was a nail in the ceiling of the home, and someone made up the story that there must have been a curtain there.
He already did. Focus.Maybe you can give me the correct ways the BoM was translated…and cite your source.
I disagree. They never have taught a "false narrative" that has never been Bushman's argument. His argument and the point illustrated by the introduction to the essays, is that there is a lot of history that the church hasn't made available and so they are now doing that, hence the essays. We still are t teaching everything. It's available. We don't have to teach it. if it's not important and not necessary for salvation then we are wasting the limited time we have to teach the doctrine. A stone in a hat simply is not a big deal. Read the book. See if you can produce anything like it with your face in a hat, never mind the stone.This all again point to Elder Bushman’s statement that the church teaches a false narrative of LDS history
Then you shouldn't have brought it up.Sorry. "Faith Alone" is a forbidden topic on this board now...thanks a lot.
True faith leads to works, but it's not the works that save us. I'm not sure why that's hard for you to grasp...but whatev.
Interesting how you transfered a statement made about the sources he used as being the reason for distrusting his WORK is now about we can't trust the individual. Speaking with a forked tongue takes on new meaning with your posts. One wonders how you don't constantly run amuck... Oh, wait.. you do.Noted: IYO, one of the lead historians of the Joseph Smith Papers, a patriarch, and paid church employee...a man that knows many of the GA's at a personal level, is not to be trusted.
History. And with good results it appears, even if he used bad sources.What exactly did he revise?
Why?I offered you to go through Rough Stone Rolling...if you are going to throw the man under the bus, at least address the different narratives he is revising
Something besides a urim and thummim.What did he use for money digging?
As is history replete with failures as prophets who learned invaluable lessons along the way. Moses was no choir boy. He murdered someone.The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is replete with those kings of events--as is God's church throughout the history of mankind.
Denial is the name of a river in Egypt.I am not extreme at all;
LOLmore LDS hold the same view as I do on this subject
That's being extreme. Your support for that conclusion is what? Your personal opinion. Did you take a vote of all Mormons or just 51% of them?It is hardly being extreme to tie Josephs worldview and practices of money digging and all that went with it, into the inception of Mormonism.
Again, your global vision is godly. You don't know what the younger generation sees. You assume because some of them ask tough questions that that is one of them? I don't think any youth care one bit that Joseph participated in treasure hunting nor do they care how he did it. These are you concerns not everyone's even though you seem to think that you have your finger on the pulse.The younger generations see it,
I don't think so, but since you do, I am probably wrong. 🙄that is where the Faith crisis's start
LOL who is "we?" I was specifically talking to Ralf, in whom he has basically called Bushman a liar and a fool. What is your opinion of Elder Bushman, if you are going to speak for Ralf, then at least state your opinion of Bushman?Interesting how you transfered a statement made about the sources he used as being the reason for distrusting his WORK is now about we can't trust the individual. Speaking with a forked tongue takes on new meaning with your posts. One wonders how you don't constantly run amuck... Oh, wait.. you do.
It is exactly his argument...he is on record in a video of saying exactly that, that the LDS church is teaching a false narrative. (bold mine)I disagree. They never have taught a "false narrative" that has never been Bushman's argument. His argument and the point illustrated by the introduction to the essays, is that there is a lot of history that the church hasn't made available and so they are now doing that, hence the essays. We still are t teaching everything. It's available. We don't have to teach it. if it's not important and not necessary for salvation then we are wasting the limited time we have to teach the doctrine. A stone in a hat simply is not a big deal. Read the book. See if you can produce anything like it with your face in a hat, never mind the stone.