When I was a senior in high school my friends told me Joseph Smith put a rock in a hat to translate. I called them liars because obviously I would have been taught that. It wasn't until I was 33 years old I learned the truth.
"We should not expect the Church as an organization to teach or tell us everything we need to know and do to become devoted disciples and endure valiantly to the end. Rather, our personal responsibility is to learn what we should learn, to live as we know we should live, and to become who the Master would have us become. . . . If all you or I know about Jesus Christ and His restored gospel is what other people teach or tell us, then the foundation of our testimony of Him and His glorious latter-day work is built upon sand. We cannot rely exclusively upon or borrow gospel light and knowledge from other people-even those whom we love and trust."--David A. Bednar, April 2019
Evan Hardin this has been around. I’m 35 and have known it for a while, but I studied a lot of anti Mormon literature as a teen. Funny how that actually strengthened my testimony
It's something we tend to not focus on because it can sound weird and greatly distract from the gospel principles that more directly impact our lives. Those friends may have been turned away from seeking a personal testimony of restored truth because someone made part of Church history sound too strange. As we focus on the basics, it's easy to leave out a lot of details. Eventually we'll learn all of it, which won't happen until after death, but then, with greater perspective, everything will seem less strange.
Well, it's not so much that this information was covered up by the Church but more that there is a greater understanding of Joseph's use of the seer stone now that more historical documents have become available and been studied more widely.
I'm glad the church is being more open about how things really happened. A question I have is if Joseph had his head in a hat what was the need for the Golden plates? Why couldn't others see the plates as he was translating? Why were they sometimes not even in the same room or even the same house?
Brigham Brewer I think I remember reading that they usually shared a room (Joseph and the scribe) but would have a curtain drawn to “block the view” when the plates were uncovered. The exception to this of course is the 3 and 8 witnesses who were shown them. As for how he looked at the plates while his head was in a hat, don’t know, probably looked at the Egyptian character(s) he wanted to translate and then moved to the seer stone to get it... wild guess there. It doesn’t really matter though, if you’ve prayed and Gods told you that it’s true/happened, that’s what’s important.
I suppose to give Joseph context as to what he was doing. Imagine if he simply received the stones and was told to transcribe what was said onto paper. Still totally doable, but it would be a bit odd. Perhaps this was like "hey look, there is this ancient record, see for yourself. Here is a way to translate the record so that you can read its contents". Is the book necessary when words will be magically appearing inside of rocks? I mean no, I don't think it was necessary at all. Joseph was not able to read the book without assistance, so its not like it would have done him much good anyways. But having the book meant that this was legitimate, that he really was bringing forth an ancient record about interactions between ancient americans and God.
5 ปีที่แล้ว +2
Those are actually several questions. As I understand, the Book of Mormon was translated by the power of God, meaning, it was not in men's ways. Probably he did not need to read word by word, paragraph by paragraph, like it is done now a days. Probably the plates did not even have 'words' or 'paragraphs'. (What do I know?) Anyways, I understand the plates were protected from others so they were not tempted to greed over their physical value (pure gold, you know?). And finally, the most remarkable fact from the translation is that you can have the words Joseph Smith dictated in those days right in the palm of your hand. #justmytwocents
I can say pretty accurately when I first heard of the seer stone/hat method of translation. It was 2004 while I was serving on my mission. There were investigators and even some members asking questions about such a method, which we of course denied and in response, taught them and shared our testimonies of what we were taught, which was the more traditional story. New missionaries started coming into the field like normal. But some of them would occasionally mention this weird stone/hat story that some of them were exposed to previous to their missions by a South Park episode that had aired a little before this. This evidently got to be a point of confusion that reached all the way up to the mission president. The presiding church authority in the country where I was serving. We were taught that Joseph Smith used the nephite interpreters and breast plate, dictated off of the gold plates, and that the seer stone/hat were not used. Past prophets writing used as reference. It upsets me to this day that I was an instrument in spreading an innacurate story. Who was I to not believe everything I was taught about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon while growing up or the teachings from the mission president? Later while taking a church history class at college, and another 10 years of full church activity, not a word was said in my presence to support the stone/hat story. Joseph Fielding Smith, who was the 10th Prophet of the church, a descendent of the Smiths, a prophet, SEER, and revelator himself. I later found out he was church historian for many years, which added to his credibility in my eyes, taught that the seer stone was not used. Doctrines of Salvation 3:225-226. This book is available at Deseret book right now. It came as a real eye opener to me that in about 2015 the Deseret news is showing a picture of the seer stone and confirming the weird stone in the hat story. It was a time where I really felt like I had been lied to. For those of you that find these details of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon to be unimportant or not necessary for salvation etc. etc. I would like to just say that if the Book of Mormon is the word of God and the keystone of our religion, the coming forth of the book is of importance. Joseph Fielding Smith thought so when he wrote about it in his book entitled Doctrines of Salvation. Evidently the church thinks it’s important to tell the accurate story now. Maybe one could argue that past prophets, seers, and revelators get things wrong sometimes and that we know so much more now etc. etc. but that is a huge problem for me. Why should I follow a prophet, seer, and revelator who doesn’t prophesy, see, or reveal? Or if he does claim to do so, his prophecies, seeings, and revelations are likely to be refuted by some future prophet, seer, and revelator. This pattern does not speak well for the church’s claim to divine authority to receive revelation and speak for God.
Have you taken your concerns to God directly, so He can reassure you? That's the most important thing to do. That being said, I'll try to help also. The consistent statement from the Church and its leaders has been that Joseph Smith translated the writings on the gold plates "by the gift and power of God", as we read in the modern introduction to the Book of Mormon. There are several accounts of Joseph Smith's translation efforts from different parties involved, and from them it seems clear that he used more than one specific method over the course of the translation, using the Urim and Thummim like glasses early on but then switching to the seer stone for convenience. Whether he was using one tool or another or none, it was all through the gift and power of God. Seeking understanding of the processes now is a matter of historical work, and if you observe historical work in any area you'll find that historians change their views sometimes, for various reasons. Previously, there were some including people pretty high up in the Church who felt that the accounts of the seer stone were unreliable. From what I can tell, leaders of the Church felt no need to publish the accounts of seer stone usage, probably out of caution because official statements from the Church are taken very seriously. (People take unofficial statements very seriously, too, and so there's good reason to be cautious with official publications.) In our modern era, technology better enables not only historical work but the publishing of it, and though it costs real money and the Church does not have to do it, there are amazing resources that are freely available online to everyone to assist with personal study. Find me a web site comparable to the Church's web sites, and I'll send you a dollar. It sounds like you're concerned with modern leaders' ability to discern truth from historic documents, but I'm sure that in your time as a member of the Church and as a missionary that you have experience seeking and receiving revelation, so you should understand that it's a rare occurrence when God finds it most helpful for us to give revelation with the clarity of a text message. Also, as you said others ave suggested, some historic details simply are not the most important things for us to know in specifics. It's good to have more information--when it's available, and there are many, many cases where it simply isn't because all sorts of things in the past simply weren't recorded or the records didn't endure. However, will knowing that Joseph Smith used a seer stone bring someone to put more diligent effort into ministering to others? I doubt it. Will it enhance anyone's ability to serve as a teacher or a bishop or a choir leader? Minimally, at best. The far more important part of our spiritual journey is seeking to be close to God and receive sanctification and personal guidance through the Holy Ghost; that's what has a real and massive effect on our lives and our eternal destiny, and that's why prophets so often emphasize its importance, such as with recent #HearHim messages. If you're worried about having heard or said anything incorrect to people in the past, you probably don't need to worry about it; people are wrong about a lot of things all the time. When I've heard someone say something incorrect in Sunday School, I find it easy to forgive them, and I've found comfort in knowing that God forgives me for mistakes I make in my earnest efforts. The important part of your missionary service, again, was bringing people to seek and receive personal revelation so that they could participate in the basic principles and ordinances of the gospel and start their own journey on the covenant path. As each of us travels that path, there is much we don't understand, but over time we learn, and despite not knowing everything we find joy and peace through our relationship with God. I hope you seek and find reassurance from Him soon and as often as you need it.
Stan- You are correct The Choice on who to believe about the use of the sere stone in the book of mormon is valid do we believe Jesus Christ the angel Moroni Joseph Smith Oliver cowdery And Joseph fielding Smith regarding how the translation occurred or do we believe anti-Mormon sources that cite the hat and the sere stone? Looking at the facts state that there are no credible 1st hand eyewitness accounts of the hat and the sere stone being used in the translation. S the serious tone was so important than moroun I would have mentioned it and Jesus Christ would have talked about it in the doctrine and covenants. There is a progressive drum beat with certain church historians to rewrite the history of the church and to normalise the false belief that Joseph Smith dabbles in witchcraft and the occult in the use of the sere stone as a preparatory Phase before he received the priesthood. Why they church history is being rewritten today to include this year stone after almost a 150 years of no serious tone is beyond me.
@@johnlewis6526 I would tend to turn to standard answers. There's a part of faith that is merely a matter of choice; we choose to either believe or not, and there's real value in exercising enough faith to give God a chance to teach us even if we're feeling very unsure. Otherwise, whatever we know of God's will, we can prove it by following His counsel. In basic matters, there's always daily prayer and study of His word. The Book of Mormon was inspired by God explicitly to give people faith in Christ. Anyone can try it out. Looking at the book with the aim of faultfinding won't be helpful, and casual or distracted reading won't help much, but earnest study of the Book of Mormon is guaranteed to increase our faith in Christ and help us draw closer to God than we could without it.
ye haters of good repent of your wicked ways and be baptized. Do not yield to be tempted against that fruit which is the most delicious to the human soul
@@speechessentials9857 yeah that could mean a number of different things to people who don't know his origin or past with the stone. So they really should have explained that. But that's way more controversial and they don't want to talk about that.
@@speechessentials9857 Yeah, the video is parsing the words to avoid outright lying. The video states that "In his teenage years Joseph sometimes used a seerstone to locate lost objects." This is incorrect. Instead, it should accurately state: "Joseph had a seer stone which he CLAIMED allowed him to locate lost objects. On one occasion he alleged to have located a lost pin. On another, a feather. Joseph is documented to have used his seerstone as a scrier, where he promoted his ability to find lost or buried items with his seerstone for a fee. He never located any buried items or treasure. On one occasion he was tried and convicted of being a 'disorderly person' - this the result of his ill-fated attempt to dig up Spanish gold on the land of a man, Josiah Stowell."
The church does still possess a few of Joseph's seer stones. To the best of our knowledge, seer stones are not currently used. To use seer stones in our day, would be like President Nelson using a crystal ball! If President Nelson promised to use that crystal ball to find treasure for people, he may even be arrested for disorderly conduct! But back in Joseph's day, seer stones were like totally common, like this video outlines. Yes, the practice of treasure digging using a seer stone was frowned upon by society in general, and was actually illegal.
A. Sowards Only an actual Seer, called by God, can use a Seer stone with God's power, anyone else who does, is not doing it through God's power. There may possibly be another prophet that has used a Seer stone, but that would've been under the direction of God.
Yes the church recovered this seer stone. This one has brown and green striations and was Josephs main seer stone. He had another seer stone that was white/clearish, but he did not use that seer stone very much. There is no record of anyone else successfully using this seer stone. If you find one please let me know.
The seer stone that the church has only was for Joseph Smith. Read the new book book called Saints, The Standard of Truth. Its about the early church history.
I would say not because we have other methods of receiving revelation from HF. Seer Stones seem to be a form of divination but bc they were used to bring about the BoM, it was appropriate at the time. Idk, it’s interesting.
Would love to know how the seer stones gave some of the King James Version text, word for word, which include transcription errors and italicized added text used to identify translators supplemental additions, noting deviation from their source material, for the 17th Century Bible being used at that time.
Some of the text was different also in spots. Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Mormon, which contained some of the writings that are also in the Bible, was possibly influenced by his previous study of the King James Version of the Bible. That would account for some similarities.
@@00Fisher00 If you're getting each word, each character, letter by letter, from the seer stone, why would you look at ANYTHING else to translate? That is the most pure source. Why crack open the bible with known translation limitations and errors? Knowing there are over 10,000 changes to the Book of Mormon, why would he need to go back and make corrections, if the words literally appeared before him directly from God during the translation? There should be no errors if it was truly translated character by character from the seer stone.
@@nickmiller2244 I'm not saying he was looking at anything else to translate, and I don't think we have any indication that he used his copy of the Bible as a reference. I wasn't there and I can't say exactly what happened, but I do know that he had and was familiar with the King James Version of the Bible, so it's not surprising to me that there are similarities. Translation in any circumstance is a difficult task, and in the case of Joseph Smith it involved revelation from God, which involved both Joseph's mind and his eyes, but exactly how every word was produced is not evident from even the combination of people's accounts. It's easy to think that it would be like reading the words on the computer screens we're looking at, but that would be a naive approach. If you're just looking to find fault, then go ahead--I can't stop you--but if you're looking to understand, then the first step is to bring your inquiries to God in earnest prayer, and be ready in case answers are forthcoming but you don't get them yet, because no one on Earth has all of the answers to all questions.
i would love to know that too. but it is also very interesting to note that all of the witnesses to the translation of the Book of Mormon stated that there was no Bible or notes as a reference. Also, IF there was a Bible used as a reference, it would be very difficult to read from with his head buried in a hat.
Wait! I was raised in the church, and was NEVER TOLD about seer stones, just about the Urim and Thummin (spelling?) I've seen so many pictures of Joseph studying the plates, but not one of him with his head in a hat, despite decades in the church. Why is that?
Probably because A) knowing every detail about the process doesn't help us to seek and gain a testimony from God about it, and B ) at a glance it sounds weird, and would possibly over-complicate things for people who are new.
@@Rosskoflex "Brainwashed" is such a silly term. The biblical account of Moses talking to God through a burning bush on a mountain and having to take off his shoes first or any or various other religious traditions in the world probably sound very strange to anyone who is new to them, but it would be absurd to call people "brainwashed" just for believing in those things.
There are people saying that this information has been available for years but that we life long members have just chosen not to seek it out. Why, if we were born into this religion and taught almost daily about the life of Joseph Smith, would we seek it out? Why would you discount the fact that the "head in the hat" practice was never taught at church, but that the church only teaches about the use of the Urim and Thummim? This is information was purposefully left out by the church because they feared that people would leave the church once they discovered that Joseph Smith used the equivalent of a deck of Tarot Cards in the forming of the LDS religion. After seeing this video and doing more research it is painfully obvious why the LDS church warns its members not to associate with anyone who is openly critical of the LDS faith. Deception exists within the ranks of the LDS church, but what they want is for you to keep your head in the sand, keep following the sheep in front of you, and no matter what, don't forget to keep making that Tithing payment.
@@drewbob35 The Church is openly making information available using modern technology. That is not deception at all, and it doesn't reflect any desire for people to "keep their heads in the sand", but rather the opposite We are encouraged to learn using available resources and to seek knowledge, truth, and understanding directly from God. Concerning the translation of the gold plates, what has been taught for years was that Joseph Smith "translated them by the gift and power of God," as stated in the introduction to the Book of Mormon. That statement doesn't declare the specific methods he used. According to various accounts, he evidently used more than one method during the process, which reflects his increasing ability to serve as a seer and revelator. Earlier statements made by some prominent members of the Church make it clear that not all of the translation accounts were considered reliable, but now the Church is evidently confident in them, so we can have more confidence also in the information they provide. Far more important than knowing every detail of Church history is having a personal relationship with God and receiving a witness directly from Him about the truth of the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ in our time. Details are interesting, but a testimony from God gives us the guidance, reassurance, and strength that we need.
@@00Fisher00 well he was a kid when he had his first visions, so that's not a very good argument. Even after the vision he continued looking for treasure with his father and other older people
@@lowdethan6709 Finding fault with a child and considering the spiritual pursuits of a child are two different things. Frankly, no one claims that Joseph Smith was a perfect man, but rather that he was a prophet. Prophets have often had faults and failings. One can rightly question whether Joseph Smith was a true prophet; to answer it, we can take Jesus' words that we shall know them "by their fruits" and we can ask God directly. Millions of people have done so and have received a witness from God that He did indeed call Joseph Smith to accomplish a work in the latter days. All are invited to seek that witness for themselves.
@@dark_winter8238 Bear in mind that Brigham Young's views on race were not so dissimilar from the common attitudes of his era. Views of racial equality are pretty common in our time and in many parts of the world, but it was a rare person in the past who held similar views. It would have been good if Brigham Young had taken better views of race, but of course he accomplished many other good things. I agree that prophets are not perfect people, and I think that as we seek revelation ourselves, being imperfect people, it's easier to understand the lives of past (and living) prophets.
I learned more from South Park about the translation process than I did by growing up in the church. I kept telling my friends that the cartoon wasn't accurate and was just poking fun. I guess I was wrong. Also, serious question, what was the point of Moroni hiding the plates if Joseph just ending up using a rock inside a hat without needing the plates?
That cartoon definitely was poking fun, and may have had some accurate elements but is surely not a historical reference. The Church has verified the validity of some accounts that were not previously considered reliable. As to translation methods, Joseph Smith evidently used more than one method over time as he got better at the process, but he had to learn a lot also.
Everything presented in a four-minute video is simplified. The point of these short videos isn't to give in-depth treatises on any subject, but to provide simple explanations. When we're curious enough to learn more, we always can. There are many Church history sources, some of which are available online at the Church's own web site.
Next time you see the congregation at church starting into their phones, rememberer, they're not IGNORING your talk, they're simply too weak and must RELY on a physical medium for revelation. It's not seer stones anymore...it's seer phones!! Now you know
Cool video thanks. The video mentioned that Joseph used seer stones before the translation of the Book of Mormon to find lost treasures - are there any sources that indicate a time where he found lost treasures that he claimed to be able to find?
Tony Fieldson With regards to his success in finding lost objects, it is, at the very least, plausible that he could see things in the stone that were invisible to the naked eye--just not treasure. There is, in fact, no recorded instance indicating that Joseph could see and locate treasure in the stones. There is, however, evidence that he could use the stone for more righteous purposes. A few pieces of historical testimony indicate this. In the spring of 1825 Josiah Stowell visited with Joseph Smith, according to Joseph's mother Lucy, “on account of having heard that he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye.” There was a Spanish gold mine that Josiah believed Joseph might be able to help locate. When Joseph was brought to court in Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York on trial for charges of being a "disorderly person", Josiah testified in Joseph's defense that he could see things in the stone. There are two records of Josiah's testimony: that of a man named WD Purple and a Miss Pearsall. The Purple account is quoted first and the Pearsall, second: “The next witness called was Deacon Isaiah Stowell. He confirmed all that is said above in relation to himself, and delineated many other circumstances not necessary to record. He swore that the prisoner possessed all the power he claimed, and declared he could see things fifty feet below the surface of the earth, as plain as the witness could see what was on the Justices’ table, and described very many circumstances to confirm his words. Justice Neeley soberly looked at the witness, and in a solemn, dignified voice said: ‘Deacon Stowell, do I understand you as swearing before God, under the solemn oath you have taken, that you believe the prisoner can see by the aid of the stone fifty feet below the surface of the earth; as plainly as you can see what is on my table?’ ‘Do I believe it?’ says Deacon Stowell; ‘do I believe it? *No, it is not a matter of belief: I positively know it to be true.*’” “Josiah Stowel [sic] sworn. Says that prisoner had been at his house something like five months. Had been employed by him to work on farm part of time; that he pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were, by means of looking through a certain stone; that prisoner had looked for him sometimes, - once to tell him about money buried on Bend Mountain in Pennsylvania, once for gold on Monument Hill, and once for a salt-spring, - and that he positively knew that the prisoner could tell, and professed the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone: that he found the digging part at Bend and Monument Hill as prisoner represented it; that prisoner had looked through said stone for Deacon Attelon, for a mine - did not exactly find it, but got a piece of ore, which resembled gold, he thinks; that prisoner had told by means of this stone where a Mr. Bacon had buried money; that he and prisoner had been in search of it; that prisoner said that it was in a certain root of a stump five feet from surface of the earth, and with it would be found a tail-feather; that said Stowel [sic] and prisoner thereupon commenced digging, found a tail-feather, but money was gone; that he supposed that money moved down; that prisoner did not offer his services; that he never deceived him; that prisoner looked through stone, and described Josiah Stowel’s house and out-houses while at Palmyra, at Simpson Stowel’s, correctly; that he had told about a painted tree with a man’s hand painted upon it, by means of said stone; that he had been in company with prisoner digging for gold, and *had the most implicit faith in prisoner’s skill*.” There are a few other historical evidences that can be read to demonstrate Joseph's ability to see things in the stone. Martin Harris reminisced in an interview in 1859: “I…was picking my teeth with a pin while sitting on the bars. The pin caught in my teeth and dropped from my fingers into shavings and straw… We could not find it. I then took Joseph on surprise, and said to him-I said, ‘Take your stone.’ … He took it and placed it in his hat-the old white hat-and place his face in his hat. I watched him closely to see that he did not look to one side; he reached out his hand beyond me on the right, and moved a little stick and there I saw the pin, which he picked up and gave to me. I know he did not look out of the hat until after he had picked up the pin.” In the same interview, Martin testified to Joseph's finding of the plates by the power of the seer stone: “In this stone he could see many things to my certain knowledge. It was by means of this stone he first discovered these plates.” Henry Harris testified: “He [Joseph Smith] said he had a revelation from God that told him they [the Book of Mormon plates] were hid in a certain hill and he looked in his stone and saw them in the place of deposit.” A Mr. Wanderhoof reported that Joseph used his seer stone to find a stolen mare for his grandfather. Latter-day Saint historían Richard Bushman has noted something about two of Joseph’s neighbors Willard and Sally Chase: “Willard Chase, one of the Smith's neighbors and a friend of Joseph's, found one of the tones. Chase let Joseph take the stone home, but as soon as it became known "what wonders he could discover by looking in it," Chase wanted it back. As late as 1830, Chase was still trying to get his hands on the stone. His younger brother Abel later told an interviewer that their sister Sally had a stone too. A nearby physician, John Stafford, reported that "the neighbors used to claim Sally Chase could look at a stone she had, and see money. Willard Chase used to dig when she found where the money was." After Joseph obtained the plates, Willard Chase led the group that searched the Smith's house, guided by Sally Chase and a "green glass, through which she could see many very wonderful things.” What may be said about Joseph's abilities to see is that he could see things that allowed him to do good. He could not see that which he was not meant to see.
@@andreweastwood6569 I don't know much of the history about it, but do remember that he was a kid at the time. That perspective should be kept in mind.
I'm surprised they are allowing comments on this video. In any case, if the use of seer stones was no big deal, why no mention of them in institute manuals or in Sunday school for all the time I grew up in the church?
You said it: it's no big deal. There are a lot of details of Church history that are available to serious students, but most people don't dig that much into it. Most people don't need to; the foundation of our faith doesn't rely on knowing a lot of details about Church history.
@@00Fisher00 Even if we say it's not a big deal, I think a lot of people still have a problem with the fact that official church media has frequently and deliberately misrepresented how the translation happened. Videos like this are a step in the right direction, but what many of us want is a simple acknowledgement from the church that it hasn't always been forthcoming about it's history.
@@00Fisher00 Totally agree. The internet has allowed so many people access once hidden or time consuming information. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints biggest "Thorn" is open access to real history vs the traditional white washed and or propagated history we grew up with. History is now open for all of us to read and build a more colorful and nuanced picture of how the world works, how we got here and how it comes together. Of course, this does not mean we have definitive or objective truth per se. But we have definitely come closer to truth and now we can make better value judgments based off of more information. Facts, history, the scientific method, and the empirical model has allowed for this world to no longer function on faith and thereby allow people's, families, communities and ultimately Nations to flourish and survive.
This is not actually "new" information. This was something that I learned from an Institute class on Church history, way back when In was in college (30 or so years ago). At that time, the seer stone was stored in the Prophet's Vault near Salt Lake City. We were told that the reason it wasn't commonly taught was that the Church felt that it cause folks to focus on the "mysteries," and lose focus on the more important things, like the saving ordinances, the Savior's example and such. It was thought that it would be more of a distraction than any of any value. And, that makes sense, really. It's more of a curiosity than of any real significance.
That's a very morally grey area. Kind of like they're justifying the real story being hidden and replacing it with that lie that the book of mormon translation we had today was supposed to be from the urim and thummim. Thats kind of the same as trying to hide how a food product was made that you had people constantly consuming and instead giving a false or half true answer to what was in that product people were consuming. People would probably stop consuming the product if they knew that it was made from something else other than what you told them. If some kid with allergies eats the product because he thought it was dairy free and dies from an allergic reaction people would be out to kill the dude who lied about the creation of the food product. Its not justified to hide whats actually in the stuff just so they can focus on the purchase and continual loyalty to the stuff. Thats how drug dealers get killed as well. There's so many dirty analogies to this. I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking the "leaders" of the church who think that this is justified. Because they are "trippin".
@@kelphiuspolluxeldanimus6426 I'll fix your analogy. If someone was uncertain about whether a food would cause an allergic reaction, they wouldn't serve it. Similarly, when the Church was uncertain about the translation accounts that mentioned the seer stone, they didn't promote those accounts. These days we have higher confidence. That being said, we have several accounts, including usage of the Urim and Thummim, and it seems evident from them that Joseph Smith began translating with those but then found it more convenient to use the seer stone. It helps to really try to figure it out. I very much appreciate leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ that help make information available to us.
Not everyone was taught that in class. You were lucky to have a good teacher. And if you hold back information of that magnitude guess what happens? People leave the church like is happening now. They feel lied to by the church. Not because of the top hat and seer stone. But because they did not get informed consent and were told another story thinking the truth may hurt their delicate eyes and ears.
I was quite shocked as I found this ”new” narrative to be true as I did research after seeing the South Park episode about Joseph Smith some years back. It felt weird that I had never heard about it during my 30 + years as a member. That was not the story I taught as a missionary in the 80’s. Why was not the true church history taught from the beginning?
I agree. I served a mission, have been to the temple, member my whole life, etc. but I just learned of this recently. I’m not upset about the stones. I’m upset that the church kept them more or less a secret. You would have hard to have know what you were looking for to find this info in the past.
@@hr5873 Many people did know about them, but there wasn't a need to emphasize every detail. Even now there isn't, but it's easier with modern technology to make some information more readily available with adequate explanations.
@@00Fisher00 The problem is that the church for years has pushed a narrative that Joseph physically translated from the plates. They have published many official images and media tools with that depiction including images located in Preach My Gospel as well as in the film that they used to show at temple square (I think it was called Joseph Smith: Prophet of the Restoration or something like that). You say there was no need to emphasize every detail. Fine, I can buy that. Answer this instead: why did the church feel the need to emphasize a historically inaccurate version of the story? Further, while I can also buy that some past apostles have probably mentioned the seer stones and that some older seminary manuals might have included it, I never once heard this taught. I grew up in the 90's and actively participated in the church in all aspects, graduated from seminary, served a mission, and completed the religion requirement at BYU. The ONLY time I ever heard the phrase seer stone used was in conjunction with the Urim & Thummim. In other words, I was led to believe that Joseph translated the plates while physically having them in front of his person using the U&T. Turns out he preferred to use his own personal seer stone instead and that the U&T were not, in fact, the seer stone he used to translate. So forgive me if I feel like the church deceived me. That's fine if you want to argue they didn't actively deceive me and the information was there all along, but they certainly omitted certain details from the narrative that is generally taught. To me, at the very least, this is deception by omission and was a conscious choice by the church until the internet age forced their hand.
@@tylerah7585 The translation of the Book of Mormon happened a long time ago and understanding the history of anything in the past can be difficult. We only have a few accounts of the translation process. There were (and still are) a lot of things said about the Church and its history that were not only defamatory but deceitful, and it has been important for us (broadly speaking) to not accept anything that is said. (Or in modern parlance, "don't believe everything you see on the Internet" or "watch out for fake news".) Even some scholars were disinclined to believe the accounts of Joseph Smith's usage of a seer stone apart from the Urim and Thummim he received with the gold plates. With more historic review and the modern technology of the Internet, the Church has made reliable accounts available. Some of these accounts describe the usage of the Urim and Thummim that some of us were more familiar with. Some describe usage of the seer stone. It seems that Joseph Smith used more than one method during the several months of the translation process. I'm nor an official representative of the Church , but it makes sense to me that the church emphasized A) what it knew to be reliable history at the time, and B) what is most faith-promoting. Maybe none of my answers are satisfying to you, but that's how I understand things, so I hope it's helpful in some way.
I think this presentation does more to cast doubt on the biblical use of stones and other cultural objects/superstitions, and on the efficacy of European “18th century cultural practices”, than it does to support the divinity of Joseph’s glass looking and treasure seeking.
@@00Fisher00 You are correct in that statement. In my opinion, the reason the church never talked about the seer stones in the hat was that it sounded crazy and certainly not spiritual. It was only in the recent past when historical evidence by ex-LDS and investigators finding journals of Emma and Cowdery and Whitmer turned up about the use of the seer stones that the church had to figure out how to put a "spin" on it that doesn't sound so ludicrous. Not to mention the wonderful piece of church art work showing Joseph Smith running his hands lovingly over the plates as he translated them looks so much better than if it were him sitting with his face in a hat such as a treasure seeker would do and a she had done countless times before when looking for lost treasures. It would have been a PR nightmare.
Interesting that I never was taught this growing up in the church, in seminary, on a mission. I learned this fact after returning home, after scoffing at the idea of this being true I then learned it was... Sure seems that a lot of rather questionable facts regarding Joseph and the foundations of the church were hidden for years and now coming to light due to the mass availability of information the church can no longer hide behind.
Hi @SnowroxKT, thanks for tuning in to the video and for sharing your experience. In a 2018 Face to Face event, Elder Quentin Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and several Church historians responded to a similar question about why the Church has not been more open about controversial Church history topics. See their response at 14:18 here: th-cam.com/video/kpLN6AomRQY/w-d-xo.html. Elder Cook and the historians explain that information about challenging Church history or doctrinal questions has been available, but that these topics weren’t always talked about or discussed. This may have been because leaders and teachers were uncomfortable with these topics, but also because the main purpose of Church meetings, including seminary and institute, is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. We also know much more now about these topics than we did 30-40 years ago, and the Church has made a tremendous effort to make its history more accessible and understandable with the publication of the Gospel Topics Essays, the Joseph Smith Papers project, the narrative history, “Saints” and accompanying Church History topics and videos, and more. We invite you and others interested to learn more about these resources here: history.churchofjesuschrist.org/
To say they were embarrassed by history is a disgrace. The whole history department of the church should have been terminated if that was true. They have an ethical duty to report any information to members. And while we're on the subject, the Saints book series is a disgrace. It glosses over key parts of church history. Even I think the church history department could do better than this.
@@scottbrandon6244 Who said anyone was "embarrassed by history"? The Church's moral duty is to truth. As I mentioned elsewhere, it's not appropriate for the Church to promote any information that isn't known to be true. I don't find Saints to be a problem at all; any historian, when presenting information, has to choose what to emphasize and what to omit, depending on the purpose of relating the history.
Quite honestly, the fact that they have the audacity to say “now you know” at the end of the video baffles me. The church would have looked down on a video like this 10 years ago but all of a sudden now they want to be more transparent. This church is deceiving and like to hide a lot of history. Disgusting
On the contrary, the Church is using modern technology to conduct historical work and make the information freely available. You can find it all on the Church's web site. That's the opposite of trying to deceive. Some accounts were of questionable credibility before, but now the Church has confidence in them. It's really as simple as that.
@@krismurphy7711 The Church hasn't been forced to do anything. The Church has used the Internet as a tool to make tons of information available--not only quotations, but source documents. If Church leaders had any intent to deceive, they simply wouldn't provide information. But for those who seek understanding from God while learning, there's no problem. If you seek truth, then I wish you the best.
Fortunately I grew up 50 years ago with legendary neighbors that earnestly researched this stuff: Truman Madsen and Susan Easton Black. So since I was tiny, I heard all the stories about this and all the other stuff that still surprises people to this day. But these were the cutting-edge researchers, who were digging and discovering "new" stuff full-time. And even though they published and lectured about all of it, very few people knew it was there to be read or listened to. And even fewer cared enough to actually read and study about it. Ignorance is always problematic, but I think it's rarely malicious. It's good to see all that info I grew up with starting to finally get more common.
When you are teaching someone to trust revelation how would you do it? It would make sense Joseph would "practice" with seer stones for mundane things as a young man so that when it came time to do the job for real, he could trust what he was seeing. If you just hand someone a strange book and said, this rock will tell you what it says, anyone would look at you funny. But if you had practiced with those stones and learned to trust them, then when someone gave you a record to translate, you could trust what the revelation was telling you. One of the things we can see in the scriptures is that God teaches line upon line. He leads you baby steps at a time. The same was true for Joseph.
This is so true. Joseph Smith had to learn some way. Back then he did not have seminary, the standard works, or any of the other tools we have today. He had the Bible and the culture of his time. He was prepared spiritually to restore the Gospel. I think that some people (both members and non-members) have a hard time with the way it was done, because we like to apply a lot of historical relativism and judge Joseph Smith with our worldview and perspective.
in the age of the internet, i'm excited to see how missionaries teach the church. i hope they receive more complicated questions and speak more of the details.
I think you're missing the point. Seer stones are not important in gaining a testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints. I made the mistake many times on my mission into thinking that stuff like this was important in their conversion unto Christ, when it is really very low on the scale of importance.
Wow this is amazing!!! Growing up in the church you vehemently denied both Joseph smith using the seer stones in a hat and to find lost items as a teenager. Because it directly contradicted the narrative of finding the seer stone with the plates and the logistics of for one actually needing the plates to translate the book of mormon, and how the process happened. When I mentioned the hat the response was and I quote "The plates were too big to fit in a hat"
When I was a young child I had a blanket that comforted me and helped me feel secure. Then I matured and realized I didn't need it anymore. The blanket never really did anything, it was a piece of light green material. I think God understands our nature and psychology. Sometimes we need physical objects to lean on and focus us, until we can progress past it.
I am a faithful priesthood holder and the fire of the Lord Glory, a pleasant protective assuring connection is felt daily...... Sometimes i just wonder how i could perfectly hear and comverse with the Lord as man speaks to man as the prophet Joseph Smith. I have had very scattered occassiona in the temple, or around tbe temple..... Other occassions its morely impressions and feelings....... I wouldnr mind the Lord giving me a Seerstone like the prophet Joseph Smith.....Lol
Maybe after the 116 pages were lost by Harris. The entire BM we have today most likely came from a seer stone and top hat. That is what Harris, Emma, Three Whitmers and Cowdery testify.
There’s a lot of comments here saying the Church has tried to hide this stuff. I’ve been a member my whole life and I have known about these stones for as long as I can remember. I didn’t know some people considered them as secret or tabu. Basically this video explains what I already knew from going to Church each week.
Same here. People keep saying "the church" didn't teach it. The lessons are taught by other members of the church who often are not well versed in history or even doctrine. Most of the time they're preparing their lessons an hour before class.
@everyday tenor Some people did and some people didn't, but in past decades the validity of some accounts was not certain; history is always an ongoing study and Church historians have reached a point where they are confident about some subjects enough to publish more.
Where did you hear them? They were not part of correlated curriculum. I have teachers manuals going back to the 1950s and it was not there. You may have had good teachers in institute or seminary but if was not official curriculum. In fact art work and material told another story. Not top hat or seer stones were part of the story. JS never discussed it.
The answer is NO he did not use the seer stone for translation, as described in d&c 26&27 he used the stone in bowls as described as the U&T. The only accredited account says the hat theory is false he did use a so called seer stone as example in a few instances but he never used it to translate as stated by the prophet Joseph Field Smith. Knowing the truth of Mormon History and what sources to trust is important.
For quite some time, Church historians were doubtful about the accounts that mention the seer stone, but that is no longer the case. I'd suggest looking at modern articles on the Church's web site for better understanding.
Not hardly, but I always find it interesting that people use an impressive feat--gymnastics--as a pejorative. It tends to feel like those who use the term are mentally sitting on the couch. For my part, I don't mind putting effort into understanding, but this doesn't require much effort at all.
Life long "mormon" here, this video is news to me. This is not what we were taught growing up. Why is it all changing? I saw pictures in the Book of Mormon showing Joseph Smith translating the gold plates, but now he didn't. I'm incredibly confused. How could it all be wrong?
It's not changing. There is plenty in Church history that has been available to people who investigated deeply. He did translate the golden plates, originally with some assistance from physical objects. Over the years, some people have been taught more about the translation process, but a lot of the details end up not being particularly meaningful. Here's the question: do you have a testimony from God? If so, then you've learned a bit more about Church history. If not, then what you really need to do is pray to Him, but that was the case anyway.
Because more and more people are finding out the truth with access to history through the internet so now the church has to come out and act as though they have always taught these things and have to dance around the hard facts and explain them so they are believable so people don’t leave the church.
@@jinx3264 The Church isn't acting like they've always taught everything in the same way. It's only in recent years that some historical elements have been considered more reliable and that we have the technology to disseminate the information. There's no dancing around hard facts here, but rather just presentation of them. Concerning belief, I've noticed that belief is very much a matter of choice. Two people can look at the same facts and derive different conclusions from them. For my part, given the answers I've received from God, it's not hard for me to make sense of parts of Church history that confuse of trouble some other people at times. It's clear from the comments on this page that many others take the same approach that I have. I am incredibly blessed, and from my personal experiences in life it's easy to see that it has all come from God, and I'm quite in awe at the great things He is doing through the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Sure, the Church is filled with people who have a great variety of faults, but overall it's amazing. I hope you can soon make sense of the parts of Church history that have troubled you.
The Church keeps the last seer stone that The Prophet Joseph Smith used in the Granite Mountain vault. It has not been used as a seer stone since Joseph Smith used it. But ,it was placed on the Alter in the Celestial room in the Manti Temple when it was first Dedicated. So, Now you know. I also know that Joseph Smith is the Prophet of the Restored Church of Jesus Christ, called the Church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints, and is led today by a true Prophet ,President Russell Marion Nelson.
See, I knew a lot of these stories as a teenager. I'd hear them and ask my parents. My Dad knew a lot about Church History. Back in the day you could get a degree in Church History, and my Grandma had done that while raising her kids, so a lot of it trickled down to my Dad. Whenever I had questions, I was encouraged to ask. My brother then took a lot of Church History classes at BYU, and would come home and share the stories. Fascinated, I made sure I did too and was greatly inspired by my classes and family to always seek truth and understanding in history. It is honestly only recently that I have realized that my family's passion for history is unique, and that most people these days do not know the amount of Church and American history that my family does. (Seriously, like I know older kids these days that are blindsided when I mention the Civil War happened). I guess what I'm saying, is all this information was always available (my fav church history professor had published or co-published a lot of books in her field), but the Church has wonderfully gone the extra mile today to make it common knowledge and easily available with videos and The Saints books. I feel like it was a minority in the church who would always be like "hush, we don't talk about those things cause they're different!" And I'd be like "Why? I though different was good?" But having people around with that attitude made some members feel like they weren't supposed to learn or share these things. It was always Church policy to share history, but the membership grew faster than the resources to get it out there and so it all became....awkward. Thankfully, technology makes it easier than ever to seek out historical documents and accounts!
Anthony Sweat at BYU and others have known this theory for years. Many historian said they knew for decades about a top hat and seer stone but did not openly discuss it.
My husband and I were recently discussing the passage in Abraham 3:25 about how God will "prove us in all things". Upon reflection of this scripture, we realized that as a Church we often talk about this life as "a test" but God through Abraham uses the word "Prove them" not "test them". Why is this significant? Well, because a test would assume that we already have knowledge and God is just "testing' to see what we know and what will we do with what we already know. But to be proven is something different, something more. We are here to prove to God that we will diligently and with much effort even wasting out our lives in search of light and truth for ourselves so that we may act with full knowledge of what is right and then be completely obedient to that knowledge we have obtained through asking and seeking. Since the Restoration and for the last almost 200 years of the Church's existence every President of the Church and Church scholar and historian has always placed the testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his principle scribe Oliver Cowdery as the prominent testimony of translation. It has only really been in the last few years that modern scholars have decided to favor the testimony of others who actually contract the Prophet Joseph Smith. It is apparent that every single Latter -Day Saint has to decide to choose for themselves which of the two narratives if true and which is false. Knowing that God would reveal the truth of all things through his Holy Scriptures, I found the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ himself in section 17 of the Doctrine and Covenants compelling enough that perhaps we as a church should take a second look at the sources and the witnesses for the "stone in the hat theory". The Lord Jesus Christ actually bears his solemn testimony that the Book of Mormon was translated by the Urim and Thummim. In addition to the Savior's testimony, the Lord shows the three witnesses both the plates and the Urim and Thummim and then COMMANDS them to bear testimony of the URIM and THUMMIM. So one has to wonder why the witnesses weren't shown the stone in the hat? Why were they commanded to bear testimony of the Jaredite Urim and thummim given to the Prophet Joseph for the purpose of translating the Nephite record. The answer to this question is also found in Section 17 of the Doctrine and Covenants. The Lord Jesus Christ proclaimed while commanding the three witness to bear WITNESS AND TESTIMONY of the Urim and Thummim: "And this you shall do that my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., may not be destroyed, that I may bring about my righteous purposes unto the children of men in this work". (verse 4). This is significant, very significant. The Lord reveals that a testimony of the Urim and Thummim as the instrument used in translation was ESSENTIAL to obtaining and keeping a testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith and for the Lord to bring about his righteous purposes. Let's think about this for a moment. If you are the devil, and you want to bring down the Lord's servant and stop the progression of the Lord's work what would you do? You take away the urim and thummim! You write a NEW NARRATIVE on translation and you lead people to believe that an inferior rock was used instead of a divine instrument. That is how you destroy faith and testimony. Let's stick with the Revelations of God, the Testimony of the only true witness to the translation who is the Prophet Joseph, and I think we should do some better fact checking on the motives of those like David Whitmer who pushed the idea of a stone in the hat theory instead of a urim and Thummim. There is some untold history there.
Joseph said he used the Urim and Thummim Joseph Smith History 1: 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 of translating the book.
The seer stones and plates could have worked like AirDrop or Bluethooth technology! If man can come up with something like this today, surely God could have in 1820.
That's so cool that God uses tools that the people know and are familiar with. My question is why couldn't Joseph Smith show anyone else the plates, I understand the problem and its answer now, before I thought Joseph looked suspicious because he never showed anyone else the plates. It seemed convenient that Joseph wouldnt actually have the plates but instead just use a hat and a seer stones, then he could have just lied and said he had plates when he didn't. Otherwise why wouldn't he just translate them directly like anyone else probably would. But now I understand. Thanks for these informational videos. I would love to know more about Joseph and if he was ever successful doing his treasure digging with the seer stones before God spoke to him.
I'll add that Joseph Smith did show the plates to several others. They are known as the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses. They recorded their testimonies, which are now printed with the Book of Mormon.
Question. If the seers stones actually worked then why did he not use them to find the 116 lost pages ? He claimed to be able to use them in finding buried treasure and other lost items, why did it not work for finding something so important when lost? Hmmmmm?
It just makes it More clarity was a miracle. He used the trim and thummin at times and a seer stone at other times in a completly different ma,er. What matters to me me ultimately is the spirit of peace and "warmth" I feel as I read The Book of Mormon" ican feel that special testifying in and to my soul !,d(now>f was miraculous and divine that that this book exhists and has been made availablee to us in this time. Josephwasdivinaly aidedin ways t&at just strike us modern and apt to lean towards disbelief " natural" men and wmen--even seeming " odd" if we don't step back and ask God for a testimony of the work we are reading and contemplating.
@@henrik6733 If the plates were revealed to him and the witnesses to build their strength, there shouldn't have been a problem for other members to see and help protect them.
@@00Fisher00 People really just need to know and or do two things. First, they should ponder the assertion which has been declared to have come from God, then ask for and receive an answer from God personally letting them know whether it is true or not. Right? With God, logically, both the seer stone and the golden plates, and or any material things from this world, weren't, aren't, and will never be needed.
Nada, One of the commenters made a good point. He said that Joseph may have looked a word or line on the plates then looked at the stone to translate it. Makes sense to me.
@@00Fisher00 basic truth you say. Please answer me why from at least 1980 to 2013 with the pictures of the BOM being translated using the gold plates also being included in the lesson manuals was taught as basic truth. Then in 2013 to 2019 in the Gospel Topic Essays on the church's own website there is now information of basic truth that the BOM was not translated using the gold plates but from looking at a rock in a hat. So those are two very different methods the church has now said as to how the BOM was translated. Which of those are the basic truth? Why was the first translation methodd in the paintings taught for so long and none of the paintings depict the rock in the hat method of translation?
@@Hanleia1 The basic truth is that Joseph Smith used the power and gift of God to translate the plates. The more complex details lie in what methods he used, and from accounts we have available he used more than one method. Some scholars were doubtful about the accounts of the seer stone, but the Church is now making those accounts available online. I'd also guess that not every translation method works well for artwork.
@@00Fisher00 What is the basic truth that the historically-incorrect depictions emphasize? What is this elusive basic truth that cannot be more effectively conveyed by a correct depiction?
@@00Fisher00 "Some scholars were doubtful".... Yeah, and Mike Tyson had "did not always behave with what most people would call traditional dating etiquette".
If God choose to work through seer stones then that is fine by me. Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. While going through a deviating divorce, I dropped to my knees and asked for help. I asked the lord what I should do with my life and asked 'if I am to marry again please show her to me that I can know I have found the right person'. I have been married to the girl he showed my for almost 10 years and I still have a picture that I drew after I was shown! This experience may seem unrelated but I have my own witness of God answering prayers regarding who I should marry but also regarding the truthfulness of the book of Mormon as well as many other things.
I believe it was.just like Moses .I was thinking of Moses before I watch .very true Joseph Smith was the Prophet of God. The Prophecy of Joseph Smith was on Genesis 49 :22‐26.
Christ taught that we "shall know them by their fruits." Some of the fruits of Joseph Smith are true scripture and the restored Church of Jesus Christ.
When people criticize this practice of seer-ship as being occult crystal gazing, I would remind them that they too are looking into a crystal (diode screen) for continual information. Are man's inventions greater than God's?
Seems like the story keeps changing, especially since they can’t keep up with people finding the truth on the internet. None of these was taught to me as a child. We got a sanitized version.
Some people heard about these things decades ago, but history is a hard thing to figure out. It isn't always clear which sources are reliable and which aren't. These days we live in an age where technology enables us to do better research in history work and also to share what is found. The Church has always been cautious about giving information that isn't known to be credible, but now Church historians have a higher degree of confidence in the accounts that describe the seer stone. I think it's great that we're able to learn so much, so easily these days.
I listened to this video for a minute or less and exposed the falsehood easily!!! God didn't speak through any of those objects mentioned they were really just props God used to accomplish His purpose!!! He didn't speak through any of them but He did speak to prophets directly and matter of factly !!! He also spoke through a burning bush, a cloud of smoke and pillar of fire and through His Angels who are messengers !!!
It's easy to call names, but not helpful. Something you should know is that faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ don't rely solely on Joseph Smith's words. We seek our answers directly from God, and when He answers our prayers He never lies to us or deceives us in any way.
I think its hilarious anti mormons trying to convince everyone that Joseph smith, an uneducated farmboy was such a deceptive evil genius who wanted to take over the world with MoRmOnIsM
Incorrect; supposedly mystical cards are not like what Joseph Smith used. When a prophet does God's work, it's God's work, whether he's using physical objects to help or not. Do you feel that Moses was practicing "occultism" when he performed miracles with a staff or when he held up a brazen serpent to heal people?
Oliver Cowdery wrote: Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’ (Note after JS-H 1:75, excepted from Letter I, Messenger and Advocate, vol. 1 (October 1834), pp. 14-16, also in History 1834-1836.
A few years latter Oliver Cowdery also testified to a group of people that during the translation their was a curtain between him and Joseph who read off the plates...but when historians examine the records from time of the translation (journal entries and such of people involved) it becomes clear that Oliver lied to people about how the BoM was translated. Their own documents at the time of translation are consistent with this video, not with Olivers later testimony. And yes this was the same seer stone that Joseph used and a teenager in treasure digging activities. There are also several court documents that show young Joseph Smith was convicted of treasure digging and defrauding people of money. The church has made all of these documents available...even the court records and you can look them up online for your self.
Why can't we just be intellectually and morally honest about this? The Book of mormon was largely created by Joseph Smith. It's a book of its day and time. It has some good ideas, concepts, and morals. But it was NOT translated by the power of God.
We can be and are intellectually and morally honest about it. You can ask millions of people about their personal experiences that lead them to know that the Book of Mormon is truly God's word, and they will honestly tell you about it all.
J7, Too much information in the Book of Mormon was not available at that time for him to have been able to write it or even steel it from someone else. Read the book called "Out of Darkness" then go do some research. It will help you a lot understand that he could not have written that book with such limited resources.
Someone having feelings about what they believe is true does not make the book true. You can easily discount its claims with archaeological, biological, and linguistic evidence.
@@Noneofthedays On the contrary, linguistic evidence supports the Book of Mormon, biological evidence is inconclusive, and archaelogical evidence mounts as more is discovered. We don't rely on mere feelings to know of its truth, but rather the power of God through the Holy Ghost.
“I am Mormon, and a Mormon just believes” There’s a lot of unbelievable things to believe in mormonism, the seer stone is one of them, but faith helps you accept things like that. The problem I see is the many decades of hiding this information from tithing paying members, missionaries, and investigators through inaccurate art and church manuals. Glad the church is now facing the unstoppable internet.
Latter-day saints don't believe in blind faith. We believe in having a foundation of faith in Jesus Christ and prophets' testimony of Him when the Holy Ghost testifies to us of truth. Faith helps us to know the important things when we don't know everything, and frankly, we never know everything. I've seen people lose a lot because of a few missing answers that they could have had if they had looked a bit further or waited a bit longer until the information was available. When God speaks to our hearts, it's vastly more important than any details we're missing at any given moment.
faith in general is very difficult. The parting of the Red Sea, or a resurrected body, seem just as far fetched as getting a message from a stone in a hat. But, there are many biblical witnesses to these miracles, and many modern witnesses to these miracles. it can be a very frustrating thing at times, to try to wrap our heads around these miracles.....about Jesus putting mud on a man's eye and receiving sight.......these are very interesting and peculiar claims. But the way that Paul and Peter and Stephen lived their lives, to me, is a testament that there really was substance behind the claims. The way that the Jews continued on, to me, is a testament to the truth of their records. The way that Cowery, Harris, and Whitmer testified and lived their lives, to me, is an evidence that JS's claims had substance.
@@Rosskoflex It's belief with a different kind of evidence than what we would use in scientific studies or in court, such as the testimony of prophets. God rewards true faith and our faith builds upon that. "Blind" faith implies belief without justification.
I'm.all for the God of Israel.God freed from Egypt.why would I want to be guided by Egyptians and their writings. They practice idolatry.they worship other gods.
Only in the power of now we can be connected to God, I can see now why he needed to focus his attention, block distraction to be able to translate. Then he learned how to do it without them.
I'm an LDS Christian (Mormon), and know most folks of my faith are great, loving, compassionate people. Some do, however, have what my nephew recently called a "Superiority Complex". Accurate term. Really interesting how, a bunch of Mormons are freaking out about information posted like this on TH-cam. It's always been there, and has never hurt my testimony. Instead of being judgmental for a bulk of your life, then freaking out when things somehow don't fit your narrative, you probably should have been more compassionate towards other members of the church by following the "Spirit" of the gospel; the Spirit of Christ. For the others this info bothers, its unfortunate, because you were probably raised by 'Superiority Complex' folks in the home and/or in your ward. I apologize, my message is not directed to you and breaks my heart if you were affected by these people. Most were great, but some a$$hole members tried to affect me too growing up. Fortunately for me, it didn't work.
Thank you very much for being blatantly honest..... For anyone , Christian to have pridefulness and arrogance It's called being a Pharisee.. And Jesus Christ said terrible things about it. Even referring to them as pit vipers...
We could call a microscope or a telescope a scrying instrument... I think that that is a very primitive term... It is somewhat very inappropriate...in prophetic Revelations... For translations under the spirit of God...are holy.
If god could just give Joseph revelation without the use of stones, then why didn’t do it the whole time? What’s the point of any artifact when god could just choose to do miraculous things such as curing people and translating plates?
Do you ask those questions only to express skepticism, or are you really looking for the answers? You can ask why God used a staff to help Moses, or why He gave Moses the tasks He did in the first place when God could have killed or restrained all of the Egyptians and lifted the Israelites out of Egypt. At some point, God has to balance helping us with letting us do things on our own, like any earthly parent has to do with our children. God could give you revelation to answer your questions in perfect clarity, but it wouldn't suit His purposes to take away the need for us to expend any effort on our part. Another aspect of it is that in order for God to give us something, we often have to actively receive it, and as people we have varying degrees of willingness and ability to do so--even prophets.
The seer stone in the hat was perfectly described at the Peter Whitmer home that had a big window (letting in light) where Joseph was translating. He could pick up right where he left off after a break without anything being read back.
I had a thought about the plates not being in direct use. Thinking this out more, what if there were no plates, then it would be difficult to conceptualize a translation of a record that never was. I rather have the plates and they not be in direct use as opposed to not having them at all. How blessed we are to have the Book of Mormon. I found out this was true while I was locked up 20 years ago. I am a totally different person now #blessed
God doesn't need anything, but sometimes people do. Why did Moses use a staff? You give people an awful lot of credit if you assume that they're completely capable of everything without any assistance merely because God has told them to do something.
For me the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Is the book true or not? The book tells us how we can know in the same way we can know that God is our Father: that Jesus is the Christ: Is this Church established and organised by the Lord through modern prophets. The Lord knows all things and it’s by the power of the Holy Ghost that personal revelation comes. I have experienced many many times the power and voice of Jesus Christ working and alive in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and indeed continue to do so. I will go to the Lord’s house tomorrow and l know l will experience it again. I feel the Lord speaking to me in the Book of Mormon and other sacred scriptures. This is his work. I am so grateful to know this and how the gospel has blessed my life and the life of my family Thanks and praise be to Our Heavenly Father and our Saviour and for the blessed gift of the Holy Ghost ❤🙏🏻
Look up Daniel Peterson on TH-cam. A professor at BYU and he is incredible. Also read 'A case for the Book of Mormon' written by Tad Callister. These two men (with their knowledge) can help anyone navigate BOM/Joseph Smith questions. For example-BOM at 531 pages translated in about 68 days, no notes, no 'readbacks' after breaks, by a man who couldn't write a coherent letter.. Moroni said it best 10:3 (page 529). As it's said doubt your doubts, not what you know.
Even the Liahona probably sounded strange for a long time, and yet these days it's so, so normal for someone to look at a handheld device that gives us information. It's a funny but interesting perspective.
All this back and forth about the seer stones and Church History. Few questions you will need to answer for yourself - and I hope God helps you - if you are troubled are: 1. When you read the Book of Mormon, don't you feel the power of the Holy Ghost? Don't you find supernal truths? 2. Jesus Christ had only one Church, if so, where is it? Because quite honestly, and feel free to do your research, if The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is not it, then it simply does not exist. 3. Has the Book of Mormon not delivered what is promised: "..Draw you closer to God.."? 4. Have you not been made to love and respect and honor God more through the 4 standard works? If your questions to 1,3 or 4 is yes, then do as the Book of Mormon has warned: "...condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless...". Stand on the truth you know, don't let the devil or his cunning craftiness, through anyone or anything steal your testimony and cause you to murmur against God because of the little failings of a few mortals. If you do, you will only have yourself to blame.
This is exactly what I’m thinking. All these debates about church history and Joseph Smith will go on forever, but at the end of the day a bitter fountain can’t bring forth good water and a good fountain can’t bring forth bitter water. I definitely feel the spirit when reading the BoM
Yes, please put the closed captions and the American Language Signs on all the videos so we will understand what is being said. The deaf members and the hearing members are alike. as we all are God's children. Thank you!!!!
They seem to be reference information through comparsion of writing. Like how the Rosetta stone allowed us to understand hieroglyphs. They remind me of oracle bones too, and their writing.
Ok, if it was no big deal and a "common" thing to do, then why wasn't it taught commonly in any Sunday School, Seminary, Priesthood or Relief Society class, missionary training, or a general conference talk each year? If this "spiritual growth" of Joseph Smith was so apparent, significant and a clearly viable lesson to us all, then why wasn't it taught to us all from Primary onward? Why did I not hear of this "common knowledge" for over a half century? You think we weren't attending church?!!
It wasn't taught when it wasn't considered to be reliable history. It's only in more recent times that Church historians and leaders have examined some accounts and determined that they were accurate. It's normal for historians to learn more and rethink ideas about the past as they do so.
Hi @Cage SC, thanks for your question. In a 2018 Face to Face event, Elder Quentin Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and several Church historians responded to a similar question about why the Church has not been more open about controversial Church history topics. See their response at 14:18 here: th-cam.com/video/kpLN6AomRQY/w-d-xo.html. Elder Cook and the historians explain that information about challenging Church history or doctrinal questions has been available, but that these topics weren’t always talked about or discussed. This may have been because leaders and teachers were uncomfortable with these topics, but also because the main purpose of Church meetings, including seminary and institute, is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. We also know much more now about these topics than we did 30-40 years ago, and the Church has made a tremendous effort to make its history more accessible and understandable with the publication of the Gospel Topics Essays, the Joseph Smith Papers project, the narrative history, “Saints” and accompanying Church History topics and videos, and more. We invite those interested to learn more here: history.churchofjesuschrist.org/
Funny thing is, Joseph Smith never mentioned a seer stone. Those who mentioned it, did so after the fact they left the church. Hmmm... sounds pretty fishy. Also, why would God have the Nephite prophets prepare a seer stone for Joseph Smith to translate, then have it replaced with a seer stone? It doesn’t make sense at all. Friday ngt - August 27, 2021.
It seems to have been a mater of convenience as he grew in ability. I think that makes sense. As he became more capable in receiving revelation, he eventually didn't require any object to help him. Church historians used to view accounts of the seer stone with more skepticism, but history work changes with time as we learn more.
July 1993 Ensign has an article by now President Nelson which mentions the seer stone and top hat. There is a book by Neal Maxwell that discusses the seer stone and top hat for translating the BM. So does the gospel topics essays and the book Rough Stone Rolling.
Is it true that Joseph's peep stone looking friend Samuel Lawrence was the one that "saw" the "spectacles" which were later termed as the Urim and Thummim?
Fascinating. Does anyone know where I can find more info about the Reformed Egyptian? I’ve tried researching the internet, but the only place it’s ever mentioned is when referring to Joseph Smith. I’m hoping for a more fact-based source, rather than just the man that started the religion claiming it’s factual. Thanks for any help.
To my knowledge it was a written language used specifically for the Book of Mormon, for the sake of more efficient engraving. I don't think it exists anywhere else.
@@SkinnyMikeD No, it's a language that we don't have many examples of. This is not uncommon. There are many languages which have only been spoken, and some are dying out. Some written languages have very limited remaining examples of usage. It would be kind of fun if we'd had perfect record-keeping ability since the dawn of human existence, but that wasn't the case.
@@00Fisher00 So I am to believe that God invented an entire occult ad-hoc language for Nephi & Co. to chisel into the Gold Plates, which Joseph Smith would later translate into English? And this Egyptian language did not survive in any shape/form on the continent where this 1,000 year civilization lived and died, such that archeologists would never discover evidence of this Egyptian language influence?
@@ozymandias6743 People have invented languages thousands of times over in human history, whether spoken or written. It makes sense that for a most important record, a more durable medium would be used, such as metal plates. If using a medium like that, it also makes sense to write in a language that would be easier to engrave, whereas even if the same written language was used elsewhere, which may or may not have happened, it has often happened that ancient records have been destroyed over time. It's happened more than once that we've only found scant evidence of some ancient languages having existed.
Continued. The next page was one the left opposite to a modern book of which we are familiar. So when the page was turned, it should be going to the right and not to the left. Nearly all of the Church produce videos about the gold plates of the Book of Mormon have this error
I for one do not believe the new narrative that is being foisted upon the Church by modern scholars and historians. It totally contradicts the testimony of Joseph Smith the Prophet and Oliver Cowdery his scribe. No source should be considered more credible than theirs. And yet our modern scholars and intellectuals would rather place their trust and validity in the words of the critics and scoffers than in the words of the Prophets themselves. The most tragic part of this... is that some in Church leadership, correlation dept, curriculum dept, etc. have embraced the scholars over and above the prophets as well.
It's not a contradiction, though. No one but Joseph Smith witnessed the entire translation process. We can piece together what happened by using all of the reliable accounts. It is understandable that Joseph Smith used more than one specific method.
Dictating the book the way he did and seeing how remarkably complex, profound and consistent the text is is beyond human ability. Plain and simple. He could have been hanging upside down by his ears with a mummified yak tongue telling him the words, it wouldn't make the book any more or less credible. The text stands on its own regardless of how it came to be. The Book of Mormon is truly the most incredible volume of scripture. The only thing I like more is the 4 Gospels that have the account of the mortal life of the Savior in the New Testament. But the Book of Mormon, read, studied and understood in concert with the Bible is truly an incredible book of testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ, doctrine, principles and prophecy.
That’s a pretty strong statement to make and one I held for most my life. That’s is until I started researching writers and the various methodology they used. It was absolutely within reason that Joseph could have made the book up. I’d suggest you do more research before making such a statement in the future. Remember knowledge is power.
So I have a family member that claims he was given a seer stone from Jesus. I’m thinking he’s going crazy. Can anyone get a seer stone? I always thought that only a Prophet could have one. Any thoughts?
He used a stone. To do what? Did he Seer the BoM, or Translate it? Is there a difference? Miraculous? Then why are we told he stared at gold plates. He never once read from the plates. This video attempts to confuse rather than clarify for the relief of valid concerns. It is endorsed by the Church. The church knows this video is misleading. What does this tell you about the church?
Your statement that "he never once read from the plates" is unfounded and incorrect. He translated by the gift and power of God. If you study the available accounts, it appears that he used more than one specific method over time. The video is not misleading; it is briefly informative, and anyone who wants to learn more can follow the link in the video's description. What that tells me about the Church is that the Church is doing what it can to inform people at the level of their interest.
@@Sirach144 Jesus taught otherwise. He knew there would be both true and false prophets in the latter days, which is why He taught that we would know prophets "by their fruits".
Genuine knowledge from God makes anything credible, if we seek and receive it. Do you deny that? Quite a few people have studied Joseph Smith's history in detail and have a lot of insight into what occurred in his life, and we understand how these things happen. You can also, if you desire.
The church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints. A seer stone reminds me of the stones that the brother Jared had Jesus Christ tuch with his finger to light the darkness in the way so they could be seen in the dark by the ones guiding the holy Ghost to , be as Jesus be , and not wait but move on to a new and everlasting covenant from blood sacrifice. The stones that Jesus Christ touched is a big conversation to dispensation and it is now no different from the original to finding out why by , what takes place from temple teachings.
Unlike regular methods, Joseph Smith's translation process relied on revelation, and it didn't always require him to look directly at the plates. From the accounts we have, it seems that sometimes he didn't.
Do you believe what Oliver says here: "I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) ... as he [Joseph] translated it by the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim" If this is true, then the other witnesses of the translation process were there only for "a few pages". And if this is true, then the far bulk of the translation was done with the U&T. Do you believe what Joseph says here: "Moroni, who deposited the plates in a hill in Manchester, Ontario county, New York, being dead and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were, and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them, and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates; and thus came the Book of Mormon." All of the witnesses that say Joseph only used a seer stone in a hat left the church. Hmm. But show me any quote by Joseph or Oliver where they say other than the above.
Show me anyone who witnessed every aspect of the process and recorded it all, and then things will be clear. Until then, we have partial accounts from different people. That's how history works pretty much all the time. There are a lot of little things that make understanding the complete process difficult; for example, even Oliver Cowdery wasn't visibly watching Joseph the whole time the translation was going on. Also, it's possible that Oliver or others could have used "Urim and Thummim" in a general sense to refer to the seer stone, because those names are used sometimes in that way. I couldn't say definitively that he did, but there are all sorts of little things that make it easy to misunderstand. Many of those details really aren't particularly important.
When I was a senior in high school my friends told me Joseph Smith put a rock in a hat to translate. I called them liars because obviously I would have been taught that. It wasn't until I was 33 years old I learned the truth.
"We should not expect the Church as an organization to teach or tell us everything we need to know and do to become devoted disciples and endure valiantly to the end. Rather, our personal responsibility is to learn what we should learn, to live as we know we should live, and to become who the Master would have us become. . . . If all you or I know about Jesus Christ and His restored gospel is what other people teach or tell us, then the foundation of our testimony of Him and His glorious latter-day work is built upon sand. We cannot rely exclusively upon or borrow gospel light and knowledge from other people-even those whom we love and trust."--David A. Bednar, April 2019
Evan Hardin me too. Exact same issue. Then i was 40 something and never even heard of a second anointing.
Evan Hardin this has been around. I’m 35 and have known it for a while, but I studied a lot of anti Mormon literature as a teen. Funny how that actually strengthened my testimony
It's something we tend to not focus on because it can sound weird and greatly distract from the gospel principles that more directly impact our lives. Those friends may have been turned away from seeking a personal testimony of restored truth because someone made part of Church history sound too strange. As we focus on the basics, it's easy to leave out a lot of details. Eventually we'll learn all of it, which won't happen until after death, but then, with greater perspective, everything will seem less strange.
Well, it's not so much that this information was covered up by the Church but more that there is a greater understanding of Joseph's use of the seer stone now that more historical documents have become available and been studied more widely.
I'm glad the church is being more open about how things really happened. A question I have is if Joseph had his head in a hat what was the need for the Golden plates? Why couldn't others see the plates as he was translating? Why were they sometimes not even in the same room or even the same house?
Brigham Brewer I think I remember reading that they usually shared a room (Joseph and the scribe) but would have a curtain drawn to “block the view” when the plates were uncovered. The exception to this of course is the 3 and 8 witnesses who were shown them. As for how he looked at the plates while his head was in a hat, don’t know, probably looked at the Egyptian character(s) he wanted to translate and then moved to the seer stone to get it... wild guess there. It doesn’t really matter though, if you’ve prayed and Gods told you that it’s true/happened, that’s what’s important.
I suppose to give Joseph context as to what he was doing. Imagine if he simply received the stones and was told to transcribe what was said onto paper. Still totally doable, but it would be a bit odd. Perhaps this was like "hey look, there is this ancient record, see for yourself. Here is a way to translate the record so that you can read its contents". Is the book necessary when words will be magically appearing inside of rocks? I mean no, I don't think it was necessary at all. Joseph was not able to read the book without assistance, so its not like it would have done him much good anyways. But having the book meant that this was legitimate, that he really was bringing forth an ancient record about interactions between ancient americans and God.
Those are actually several questions.
As I understand, the Book of Mormon was translated by the power of God, meaning, it was not in men's ways. Probably he did not need to read word by word, paragraph by paragraph, like it is done now a days. Probably the plates did not even have 'words' or 'paragraphs'. (What do I know?)
Anyways, I understand the plates were protected from others so they were not tempted to greed over their physical value (pure gold, you know?).
And finally, the most remarkable fact from the translation is that you can have the words Joseph Smith dictated in those days right in the palm of your hand.
#justmytwocents
Read Mormon 9 32-34
I think the hat was to block out light?
I can say pretty accurately when I first heard of the seer stone/hat method of translation. It was 2004 while I was serving on my mission. There were investigators and even some members asking questions about such a method, which we of course denied and in response, taught them and shared our testimonies of what we were taught, which was the more traditional story. New missionaries started coming into the field like normal. But some of them would occasionally mention this weird stone/hat story that some of them were exposed to previous to their missions by a South Park episode that had aired a little before this. This evidently got to be a point of confusion that reached all the way up to the mission president. The presiding church authority in the country where I was serving. We were taught that Joseph Smith used the nephite interpreters and breast plate, dictated off of the gold plates, and that the seer stone/hat were not used. Past prophets writing used as reference.
It upsets me to this day that I was an instrument in spreading an innacurate story. Who was I to not believe everything I was taught about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon while growing up or the teachings from the mission president? Later while taking a church history class at college, and another 10 years of full church activity, not a word was said in my presence to support the stone/hat story. Joseph Fielding Smith, who was the 10th Prophet of the church, a descendent of the Smiths, a prophet, SEER, and revelator himself. I later found out he was church historian for many years, which added to his credibility in my eyes, taught that the seer stone was not used. Doctrines of Salvation 3:225-226. This book is available at Deseret book right now.
It came as a real eye opener to me that in about 2015 the Deseret news is showing a picture of the seer stone and confirming the weird stone in the hat story. It was a time where I really felt like I had been lied to.
For those of you that find these details of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon to be unimportant or not necessary for salvation etc. etc. I would like to just say that if the Book of Mormon is the word of God and the keystone of our religion, the coming forth of the book is of importance. Joseph Fielding Smith thought so when he wrote about it in his book entitled Doctrines of Salvation. Evidently the church thinks it’s important to tell the accurate story now.
Maybe one could argue that past prophets, seers, and revelators get things wrong sometimes and that we know so much more now etc. etc. but that is a huge problem for me. Why should I follow a prophet, seer, and revelator who doesn’t prophesy, see, or reveal? Or if he does claim to do so, his prophecies, seeings, and revelations are likely to be refuted by some future prophet, seer, and revelator. This pattern does not speak well for the church’s claim to divine authority to receive revelation and speak for God.
Have you taken your concerns to God directly, so He can reassure you? That's the most important thing to do. That being said, I'll try to help also. The consistent statement from the Church and its leaders has been that Joseph Smith translated the writings on the gold plates "by the gift and power of God", as we read in the modern introduction to the Book of Mormon. There are several accounts of Joseph Smith's translation efforts from different parties involved, and from them it seems clear that he used more than one specific method over the course of the translation, using the Urim and Thummim like glasses early on but then switching to the seer stone for convenience. Whether he was using one tool or another or none, it was all through the gift and power of God. Seeking understanding of the processes now is a matter of historical work, and if you observe historical work in any area you'll find that historians change their views sometimes, for various reasons. Previously, there were some including people pretty high up in the Church who felt that the accounts of the seer stone were unreliable. From what I can tell, leaders of the Church felt no need to publish the accounts of seer stone usage, probably out of caution because official statements from the Church are taken very seriously. (People take unofficial statements very seriously, too, and so there's good reason to be cautious with official publications.) In our modern era, technology better enables not only historical work but the publishing of it, and though it costs real money and the Church does not have to do it, there are amazing resources that are freely available online to everyone to assist with personal study. Find me a web site comparable to the Church's web sites, and I'll send you a dollar.
It sounds like you're concerned with modern leaders' ability to discern truth from historic documents, but I'm sure that in your time as a member of the Church and as a missionary that you have experience seeking and receiving revelation, so you should understand that it's a rare occurrence when God finds it most helpful for us to give revelation with the clarity of a text message. Also, as you said others ave suggested, some historic details simply are not the most important things for us to know in specifics. It's good to have more information--when it's available, and there are many, many cases where it simply isn't because all sorts of things in the past simply weren't recorded or the records didn't endure. However, will knowing that Joseph Smith used a seer stone bring someone to put more diligent effort into ministering to others? I doubt it. Will it enhance anyone's ability to serve as a teacher or a bishop or a choir leader? Minimally, at best. The far more important part of our spiritual journey is seeking to be close to God and receive sanctification and personal guidance through the Holy Ghost; that's what has a real and massive effect on our lives and our eternal destiny, and that's why prophets so often emphasize its importance, such as with recent #HearHim messages.
If you're worried about having heard or said anything incorrect to people in the past, you probably don't need to worry about it; people are wrong about a lot of things all the time. When I've heard someone say something incorrect in Sunday School, I find it easy to forgive them, and I've found comfort in knowing that God forgives me for mistakes I make in my earnest efforts. The important part of your missionary service, again, was bringing people to seek and receive personal revelation so that they could participate in the basic principles and ordinances of the gospel and start their own journey on the covenant path. As each of us travels that path, there is much we don't understand, but over time we learn, and despite not knowing everything we find joy and peace through our relationship with God.
I hope you seek and find reassurance from Him soon and as often as you need it.
@@00Fisher00 any advice on how to gain faith?
Stan- You are correct The Choice on who to believe about the use of the sere stone in the book of mormon is valid do we believe Jesus Christ the angel Moroni Joseph Smith Oliver cowdery And Joseph fielding Smith regarding how the translation occurred or do we believe anti-Mormon sources that cite the hat and the sere stone? Looking at the facts state that there are no credible 1st hand eyewitness accounts of the hat and the sere stone being used in the translation. S the serious tone was so important than moroun I would have mentioned it and Jesus Christ would have talked about it in the doctrine and covenants. There is a progressive drum beat with certain church historians to rewrite the history of the church and to normalise the false belief that Joseph Smith dabbles in witchcraft and the occult in the use of the sere stone as a preparatory Phase before he received the priesthood. Why they church history is being rewritten today to include this year stone after almost a 150 years of no serious tone is beyond me.
@@johnlewis6526 I would tend to turn to standard answers. There's a part of faith that is merely a matter of choice; we choose to either believe or not, and there's real value in exercising enough faith to give God a chance to teach us even if we're feeling very unsure. Otherwise, whatever we know of God's will, we can prove it by following His counsel. In basic matters, there's always daily prayer and study of His word. The Book of Mormon was inspired by God explicitly to give people faith in Christ. Anyone can try it out. Looking at the book with the aim of faultfinding won't be helpful, and casual or distracted reading won't help much, but earnest study of the Book of Mormon is guaranteed to increase our faith in Christ and help us draw closer to God than we could without it.
Funny how something denied in 2004 is now part of the accepted narrative.
Ten years ago this video would have been called "Anti Mormon Propaganda" ....
So true. It could have perhaps prevented many members from living.
Gotta love the ever-changing standards
ye haters of good
repent of your wicked ways and be baptized.
Do not yield to be tempted against that fruit which is the most delicious to the human soul
By who? I grew up in the church learning about seer stones, in particular the Urim and Thumim, in church my whole life.
well, the truth is out there now... thank goodness for the internet
They left out the part where Joseph used the “rock in a hat” method for treasure hunting long before he found the plates
Oh, there's far more to Joseph Smith's history when he was a young child, and he didn't use a rock in a hat during that time.
The video clearly said he used it to find lost things, I guess that would include treasure
You’re a wise man Zuko
@@speechessentials9857 yeah that could mean a number of different things to people who don't know his origin or past with the stone. So they really should have explained that. But that's way more controversial and they don't want to talk about that.
@@speechessentials9857 Yeah, the video is parsing the words to avoid outright lying. The video states that "In his teenage years Joseph sometimes used a seerstone to locate lost objects." This is incorrect. Instead, it should accurately state: "Joseph had a seer stone which he CLAIMED allowed him to locate lost objects. On one occasion he alleged to have located a lost pin. On another, a feather. Joseph is documented to have used his seerstone as a scrier, where he promoted his ability to find lost or buried items with his seerstone for a fee. He never located any buried items or treasure. On one occasion he was tried and convicted of being a 'disorderly person' - this the result of his ill-fated attempt to dig up Spanish gold on the land of a man, Josiah Stowell."
So the church still has in position the seer stone and released pictures of it a couple of years ago. My question is do they still use it today?
The church does still possess a few of Joseph's seer stones. To the best of our knowledge, seer stones are not currently used. To use seer stones in our day, would be like President Nelson using a crystal ball! If President Nelson promised to use that crystal ball to find treasure for people, he may even be arrested for disorderly conduct! But back in Joseph's day, seer stones were like totally common, like this video outlines. Yes, the practice of treasure digging using a seer stone was frowned upon by society in general, and was actually illegal.
A. Sowards Only an actual Seer, called by God, can use a Seer stone with God's power, anyone else who does, is not doing it through God's power. There may possibly be another prophet that has used a Seer stone, but that would've been under the direction of God.
Yes the church recovered this seer stone. This one has brown and green striations and was Josephs main seer stone. He had another seer stone that was white/clearish, but he did not use that seer stone very much. There is no record of anyone else successfully using this seer stone. If you find one please let me know.
The seer stone that the church has only was for Joseph Smith. Read the new book book called Saints, The Standard of Truth. Its about the early church history.
I would say not because we have other methods of receiving revelation from HF. Seer Stones seem to be a form of divination but bc they were used to bring about the BoM, it was appropriate at the time. Idk, it’s interesting.
Would love to know how the seer stones gave some of the King James Version text, word for word, which include transcription errors and italicized added text used to identify translators supplemental additions, noting deviation from their source material, for the 17th Century Bible being used at that time.
Some of the text was different also in spots. Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Mormon, which contained some of the writings that are also in the Bible, was possibly influenced by his previous study of the King James Version of the Bible. That would account for some similarities.
@@00Fisher00 that literally makes no sense
@@00Fisher00 If you're getting each word, each character, letter by letter, from the seer stone, why would you look at ANYTHING else to translate? That is the most pure source. Why crack open the bible with known translation limitations and errors? Knowing there are over 10,000 changes to the Book of Mormon, why would he need to go back and make corrections, if the words literally appeared before him directly from God during the translation? There should be no errors if it was truly translated character by character from the seer stone.
@@nickmiller2244 I'm not saying he was looking at anything else to translate, and I don't think we have any indication that he used his copy of the Bible as a reference. I wasn't there and I can't say exactly what happened, but I do know that he had and was familiar with the King James Version of the Bible, so it's not surprising to me that there are similarities. Translation in any circumstance is a difficult task, and in the case of Joseph Smith it involved revelation from God, which involved both Joseph's mind and his eyes, but exactly how every word was produced is not evident from even the combination of people's accounts. It's easy to think that it would be like reading the words on the computer screens we're looking at, but that would be a naive approach. If you're just looking to find fault, then go ahead--I can't stop you--but if you're looking to understand, then the first step is to bring your inquiries to God in earnest prayer, and be ready in case answers are forthcoming but you don't get them yet, because no one on Earth has all of the answers to all questions.
i would love to know that too. but it is also very interesting to note that all of the witnesses to the translation of the Book of Mormon stated that there was no Bible or notes as a reference. Also, IF there was a Bible used as a reference, it would be very difficult to read from with his head buried in a hat.
Wait! I was raised in the church, and was NEVER TOLD about seer stones, just about the Urim and Thummin (spelling?) I've seen so many pictures of Joseph studying the plates, but not one of him with his head in a hat, despite decades in the church. Why is that?
Probably because A) knowing every detail about the process doesn't help us to seek and gain a testimony from God about it, and B ) at a glance it sounds weird, and would possibly over-complicate things for people who are new.
@@00Fisher00 "people who are new" AKA "aren't sufficiently brainwashed yet"
@@Rosskoflex "Brainwashed" is such a silly term. The biblical account of Moses talking to God through a burning bush on a mountain and having to take off his shoes first or any or various other religious traditions in the world probably sound very strange to anyone who is new to them, but it would be absurd to call people "brainwashed" just for believing in those things.
There are people saying that this information has been available for years but that we life long members have just chosen not to seek it out. Why, if we were born into this religion and taught almost daily about the life of Joseph Smith, would we seek it out? Why would you discount the fact that the "head in the hat" practice was never taught at church, but that the church only teaches about the use of the Urim and Thummim? This is information was purposefully left out by the church because they feared that people would leave the church once they discovered that Joseph Smith used the equivalent of a deck of Tarot Cards in the forming of the LDS religion. After seeing this video and doing more research it is painfully obvious why the LDS church warns its members not to associate with anyone who is openly critical of the LDS faith. Deception exists within the ranks of the LDS church, but what they want is for you to keep your head in the sand, keep following the sheep in front of you, and no matter what, don't forget to keep making that Tithing payment.
@@drewbob35 The Church is openly making information available using modern technology. That is not deception at all, and it doesn't reflect any desire for people to "keep their heads in the sand", but rather the opposite We are encouraged to learn using available resources and to seek knowledge, truth, and understanding directly from God. Concerning the translation of the gold plates, what has been taught for years was that Joseph Smith "translated them by the gift and power of God," as stated in the introduction to the Book of Mormon. That statement doesn't declare the specific methods he used. According to various accounts, he evidently used more than one method during the process, which reflects his increasing ability to serve as a seer and revelator. Earlier statements made by some prominent members of the Church make it clear that not all of the translation accounts were considered reliable, but now the Church is evidently confident in them, so we can have more confidence also in the information they provide. Far more important than knowing every detail of Church history is having a personal relationship with God and receiving a witness directly from Him about the truth of the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ in our time. Details are interesting, but a testimony from God gives us the guidance, reassurance, and strength that we need.
The seer stones were used by Joseph Smith long before he was a prophet.
It was his magical power to find treasure.
No, it wasn't magical. It was just something that he believed in as a kid, and it was like the beliefs of many other people of his time.
@@00Fisher00 well he was a kid when he had his first visions, so that's not a very good argument. Even after the vision he continued looking for treasure with his father and other older people
@@lowdethan6709 Finding fault with a child and considering the spiritual pursuits of a child are two different things. Frankly, no one claims that Joseph Smith was a perfect man, but rather that he was a prophet. Prophets have often had faults and failings. One can rightly question whether Joseph Smith was a true prophet; to answer it, we can take Jesus' words that we shall know them "by their fruits" and we can ask God directly. Millions of people have done so and have received a witness from God that He did indeed call Joseph Smith to accomplish a work in the latter days. All are invited to seek that witness for themselves.
Prophets are not perfect. Even Brigham Young had issues where he was so racist he felt God inspired him to ban black people from sacred ordinances
@@dark_winter8238 Bear in mind that Brigham Young's views on race were not so dissimilar from the common attitudes of his era. Views of racial equality are pretty common in our time and in many parts of the world, but it was a rare person in the past who held similar views. It would have been good if Brigham Young had taken better views of race, but of course he accomplished many other good things. I agree that prophets are not perfect people, and I think that as we seek revelation ourselves, being imperfect people, it's easier to understand the lives of past (and living) prophets.
I learned more from South Park about the translation process than I did by growing up in the church. I kept telling my friends that the cartoon wasn't accurate and was just poking fun. I guess I was wrong. Also, serious question, what was the point of Moroni hiding the plates if Joseph just ending up using a rock inside a hat without needing the plates?
That cartoon definitely was poking fun, and may have had some accurate elements but is surely not a historical reference. The Church has verified the validity of some accounts that were not previously considered reliable. As to translation methods, Joseph Smith evidently used more than one method over time as he got better at the process, but he had to learn a lot also.
@@00Fisher00 But why hide?
@@TheGreatGadfly Why hide what? I'm not sure what you're asking.
Because the plates are real physical proof of the nephite record delivered to Joseph Smith by the will and power of God.
Kiiiiinda feel like this is an...oversimplification?
Because it's simple
Everything presented in a four-minute video is simplified. The point of these short videos isn't to give in-depth treatises on any subject, but to provide simple explanations. When we're curious enough to learn more, we always can. There are many Church history sources, some of which are available online at the Church's own web site.
Milk before meat.
Does the work of God have to be complicated?
Well it's is supposed to be a 3-5min video, it's simplified by design.
Next time you see the congregation at church starting into their phones, rememberer, they're not IGNORING your talk, they're simply too weak and must RELY on a physical medium for revelation. It's not seer stones anymore...it's seer phones!! Now you know
I've been a part of the LDS church for all my life and only now am hearing about Joseph using a seer stone.
Some people have been familiar with the accounts that describe the seer stone, but it seems that it's only recently that they've been verified.
Sad isn’t it? I was shocked when I found out
@@jinx3264 But you didn't go to God to seek understanding? Sad, indeed.
You and most others here.
Cool video thanks. The video mentioned that Joseph used seer stones before the translation of the Book of Mormon to find lost treasures - are there any sources that indicate a time where he found lost treasures that he claimed to be able to find?
Tony Fieldson
With regards to his success in finding lost objects, it is, at the very least, plausible that he could see things in the stone that were invisible to the naked eye--just not treasure.
There is, in fact, no recorded instance indicating that Joseph could see and locate treasure in the stones. There is, however, evidence that he could use the stone for more righteous purposes. A few pieces of historical testimony indicate this.
In the spring of 1825 Josiah Stowell visited with Joseph Smith, according to Joseph's mother Lucy, “on account of having heard that he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye.” There was a Spanish gold mine that Josiah believed Joseph might be able to help locate. When Joseph was brought to court in Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York on trial for charges of being a "disorderly person", Josiah testified in Joseph's defense that he could see things in the stone. There are two records of Josiah's testimony: that of a man named WD Purple and a Miss Pearsall. The Purple account is quoted first and the Pearsall, second:
“The next witness called was Deacon Isaiah Stowell. He confirmed all that is said above in relation to himself, and delineated many other circumstances not necessary to record. He swore that the prisoner possessed all the power he claimed, and declared he could see things fifty feet below the surface of the earth, as plain as the witness could see what was on the Justices’ table, and described very many circumstances to confirm his words. Justice Neeley soberly looked at the witness, and in a solemn, dignified voice said: ‘Deacon Stowell, do I understand you as swearing before God, under the solemn oath you have taken, that you believe the prisoner can see by the aid of the stone fifty feet below the surface of the earth; as plainly as you can see what is on my table?’ ‘Do I believe it?’ says Deacon Stowell; ‘do I believe it? *No, it is not a matter of belief: I positively know it to be true.*’”
“Josiah Stowel [sic] sworn. Says that prisoner had been at his house something like five months. Had been employed by him to work on farm part of time; that he pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were, by means of looking through a certain stone; that prisoner had looked for him sometimes, - once to tell him about money buried on Bend Mountain in Pennsylvania, once for gold on Monument Hill, and once for a salt-spring, - and that he positively knew that the prisoner could tell, and professed the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone: that he found the digging part at Bend and Monument Hill as prisoner represented it; that prisoner had looked through said stone for Deacon Attelon, for a mine - did not exactly find it, but got a piece of ore, which resembled gold, he thinks; that prisoner had told by means of this stone where a Mr. Bacon had buried money; that he and prisoner had been in search of it; that prisoner said that it was in a certain root of a stump five feet from surface of the earth, and with it would be found a tail-feather; that said Stowel [sic] and prisoner thereupon commenced digging, found a tail-feather, but money was gone; that he supposed that money moved down; that prisoner did not offer his services; that he never deceived him; that prisoner looked through stone, and described Josiah Stowel’s house and out-houses while at Palmyra, at Simpson Stowel’s, correctly; that he had told about a painted tree with a man’s hand painted upon it, by means of said stone; that he had been in company with prisoner digging for gold, and *had the most implicit faith in prisoner’s skill*.”
There are a few other historical evidences that can be read to demonstrate Joseph's ability to see things in the stone.
Martin Harris reminisced in an interview in 1859:
“I…was picking my teeth with a pin while sitting on the bars. The pin caught in my teeth and dropped from my fingers into shavings and straw… We could not find it. I then took Joseph on surprise, and said to him-I said, ‘Take your stone.’ … He took it and placed it in his hat-the old white hat-and place his face in his hat. I watched him closely to see that he did not look to one side; he reached out his hand beyond me on the right, and moved a little stick and there I saw the pin, which he picked up and gave to me. I know he did not look out of the hat until after he had picked up the pin.”
In the same interview, Martin testified to Joseph's finding of the plates by the power of the seer stone:
“In this stone he could see many things to my certain knowledge. It was by means of this stone he first discovered these plates.”
Henry Harris testified:
“He [Joseph Smith] said he had a revelation from God that told him they [the Book of Mormon plates] were hid in a certain hill and he looked in his stone and saw them in the place of deposit.”
A Mr. Wanderhoof reported that Joseph used his seer stone to find a stolen mare for his grandfather.
Latter-day Saint historían Richard Bushman has noted something about two of Joseph’s neighbors Willard and Sally Chase:
“Willard Chase, one of the Smith's neighbors and a friend of Joseph's, found one of the tones. Chase let Joseph take the stone home, but as soon as it became known "what wonders he could discover by looking in it," Chase wanted it back. As late as 1830, Chase was still trying to get his hands on the stone. His younger brother Abel later told an interviewer that their sister Sally had a stone too. A nearby physician, John Stafford, reported that "the neighbors used to claim Sally Chase could look at a stone she had, and see money. Willard Chase used to dig when she found where the money was." After Joseph obtained the plates, Willard Chase led the group that searched the Smith's house, guided by Sally Chase and a "green glass, through which she could see many very wonderful things.”
What may be said about Joseph's abilities to see is that he could see things that allowed him to do good. He could not see that which he was not meant to see.
talks a bit about it in www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/saints-v1/04-be-watchful?lang=eng
I'm also wondering about this, like was the treasure seeking power real?
@@andreweastwood6569 I don't know much of the history about it, but do remember that he was a kid at the time. That perspective should be kept in mind.
I have always chalked this up to the follies of youth, I haven't heard a story of him ever being successful.
I'm surprised they are allowing comments on this video. In any case, if the use of seer stones was no big deal, why no mention of them in institute manuals or in Sunday school for all the time I grew up in the church?
You said it: it's no big deal. There are a lot of details of Church history that are available to serious students, but most people don't dig that much into it. Most people don't need to; the foundation of our faith doesn't rely on knowing a lot of details about Church history.
@@00Fisher00
But it should rely on honesty, clarity, and truth.
@@IIIJT It's easier to provide clarity these days when modern technology assists in studying history and making knowledge available via the Internet.
@@00Fisher00 Even if we say it's not a big deal, I think a lot of people still have a problem with the fact that official church media has frequently and deliberately misrepresented how the translation happened.
Videos like this are a step in the right direction, but what many of us want is a simple acknowledgement from the church that it hasn't always been forthcoming about it's history.
@@00Fisher00
Totally agree. The internet has allowed so many people access once hidden or time consuming information. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints biggest "Thorn" is open access to real history vs the traditional white washed and or propagated history we grew up with.
History is now open for all of us to read and build a more colorful and nuanced picture of how the world works, how we got here and how it comes together. Of course, this does not mean we have definitive or objective truth per se. But we have definitely come closer to truth and now we can make better value judgments based off of more information. Facts, history, the scientific method, and the empirical model has allowed for this world to no longer function on faith and thereby allow people's, families, communities and ultimately Nations to flourish and survive.
This is not actually "new" information. This was something that I learned from an Institute class on Church history, way back when In was in college (30 or so years ago).
At that time, the seer stone was stored in the Prophet's Vault near Salt Lake City.
We were told that the reason it wasn't commonly taught was that the Church felt that it cause folks to focus on the "mysteries," and lose focus on the more important things, like the saving ordinances, the Savior's example and such. It was thought that it would be more of a distraction than any of any value.
And, that makes sense, really. It's more of a curiosity than of any real significance.
Not when you factor in his treasure digging days. Then it makes it look like Joseph translated the BoM by means that was known to be disreputable
That's a very morally grey area. Kind of like they're justifying the real story being hidden and replacing it with that lie that the book of mormon translation we had today was supposed to be from the urim and thummim.
Thats kind of the same as trying to hide how a food product was made that you had people constantly consuming and instead giving a false or half true answer to what was in that product people were consuming. People would probably stop consuming the product if they knew that it was made from something else other than what you told them. If some kid with allergies eats the product because he thought it was dairy free and dies from an allergic reaction people would be out to kill the dude who lied about the creation of the food product. Its not justified to hide whats actually in the stuff just so they can focus on the purchase and continual loyalty to the stuff. Thats how drug dealers get killed as well. There's so many dirty analogies to this. I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking the "leaders" of the church who think that this is justified. Because they are "trippin".
@@kelphiuspolluxeldanimus6426 I'll fix your analogy. If someone was uncertain about whether a food would cause an allergic reaction, they wouldn't serve it. Similarly, when the Church was uncertain about the translation accounts that mentioned the seer stone, they didn't promote those accounts. These days we have higher confidence. That being said, we have several accounts, including usage of the Urim and Thummim, and it seems evident from them that Joseph Smith began translating with those but then found it more convenient to use the seer stone. It helps to really try to figure it out. I very much appreciate leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ that help make information available to us.
Not everyone was taught that in class. You were lucky to have a good teacher. And if you hold back information of that magnitude guess what happens? People leave the church like is happening now. They feel lied to by the church. Not because of the top hat and seer stone. But because they did not get informed consent and were told another story thinking the truth may hurt their delicate eyes and ears.
I was quite shocked as I found this ”new” narrative to be true as I did research after seeing the South Park episode about Joseph Smith some years back. It felt weird that I had never heard about it during my 30 + years as a member. That was not the story I taught as a missionary in the 80’s.
Why was not the true church history taught from the beginning?
The truth has been taught. Not every detail is important to tell all the time.
I agree. I served a mission, have been to the temple, member my whole life, etc. but I just learned of this recently. I’m not upset about the stones. I’m upset that the church kept them more or less a secret. You would have hard to have know what you were looking for to find this info in the past.
@@hr5873 Many people did know about them, but there wasn't a need to emphasize every detail. Even now there isn't, but it's easier with modern technology to make some information more readily available with adequate explanations.
@@00Fisher00 The problem is that the church for years has pushed a narrative that Joseph physically translated from the plates. They have published many official images and media tools with that depiction including images located in Preach My Gospel as well as in the film that they used to show at temple square (I think it was called Joseph Smith: Prophet of the Restoration or something like that). You say there was no need to emphasize every detail. Fine, I can buy that. Answer this instead: why did the church feel the need to emphasize a historically inaccurate version of the story?
Further, while I can also buy that some past apostles have probably mentioned the seer stones and that some older seminary manuals might have included it, I never once heard this taught. I grew up in the 90's and actively participated in the church in all aspects, graduated from seminary, served a mission, and completed the religion requirement at BYU. The ONLY time I ever heard the phrase seer stone used was in conjunction with the Urim & Thummim. In other words, I was led to believe that Joseph translated the plates while physically having them in front of his person using the U&T. Turns out he preferred to use his own personal seer stone instead and that the U&T were not, in fact, the seer stone he used to translate. So forgive me if I feel like the church deceived me. That's fine if you want to argue they didn't actively deceive me and the information was there all along, but they certainly omitted certain details from the narrative that is generally taught. To me, at the very least, this is deception by omission and was a conscious choice by the church until the internet age forced their hand.
@@tylerah7585 The translation of the Book of Mormon happened a long time ago and understanding the history of anything in the past can be difficult. We only have a few accounts of the translation process. There were (and still are) a lot of things said about the Church and its history that were not only defamatory but deceitful, and it has been important for us (broadly speaking) to not accept anything that is said. (Or in modern parlance, "don't believe everything you see on the Internet" or "watch out for fake news".) Even some scholars were disinclined to believe the accounts of Joseph Smith's usage of a seer stone apart from the Urim and Thummim he received with the gold plates. With more historic review and the modern technology of the Internet, the Church has made reliable accounts available. Some of these accounts describe the usage of the Urim and Thummim that some of us were more familiar with. Some describe usage of the seer stone. It seems that Joseph Smith used more than one method during the several months of the translation process. I'm nor an official representative of the Church , but it makes sense to me that the church emphasized A) what it knew to be reliable history at the time, and B) what is most faith-promoting. Maybe none of my answers are satisfying to you, but that's how I understand things, so I hope it's helpful in some way.
Wow, never saw this one coming
*hands you my seer stones* Be prepared next time bro. LOL
Common knowledge.
I think this presentation does more to cast doubt on the biblical use of stones and other cultural objects/superstitions, and on the efficacy of European “18th century cultural practices”, than it does to support the divinity of Joseph’s glass looking and treasure seeking.
That is divination. We worship God in spirit and truth.
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also worship God in spirit and truth.
Wish they would have acknowledged this from the beginning
And that he went to jail for it
Since the discovery and translation of the Rosetta Stone the Mormon tables have been pn to be nonsensical, in other words, fake revelation.
@@PurpleObscuration You've heard incorrectly. The Rosetta Stone is unrelated to the Book of Mormon.
@@00Fisher00 You are correct in that statement. In my opinion, the reason the church never talked about the seer stones in the hat was that it sounded crazy and certainly not spiritual. It was only in the recent past when historical evidence by ex-LDS and investigators finding journals of Emma and Cowdery and Whitmer turned up about the use of the seer stones that the church had to figure out how to put a "spin" on it that doesn't sound so ludicrous. Not to mention the wonderful piece of church art work showing Joseph Smith running his hands lovingly over the plates as he translated them looks so much better than if it were him sitting with his face in a hat such as a treasure seeker would do and a she had done countless times before when looking for lost treasures. It would have been a PR nightmare.
The information has been available for a long time, you just have to know where to find it.
Interesting that I never was taught this growing up in the church, in seminary, on a mission. I learned this fact after returning home, after scoffing at the idea of this being true I then learned it was... Sure seems that a lot of rather questionable facts regarding Joseph and the foundations of the church were hidden for years and now coming to light due to the mass availability of information the church can no longer hide behind.
Hi @SnowroxKT, thanks for tuning in to the video and for sharing your experience. In a 2018 Face to Face event, Elder Quentin Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and several Church historians responded to a similar question about why the Church has not been more open about controversial Church history topics. See their response at 14:18 here: th-cam.com/video/kpLN6AomRQY/w-d-xo.html. Elder Cook and the historians explain that information about challenging Church history or doctrinal questions has been available, but that these topics weren’t always talked about or discussed. This may have been because leaders and teachers were uncomfortable with these topics, but also because the main purpose of Church meetings, including seminary and institute, is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. We also know much more now about these topics than we did 30-40 years ago, and the Church has made a tremendous effort to make its history more accessible and understandable with the publication of the Gospel Topics Essays, the Joseph Smith Papers project, the narrative history, “Saints” and accompanying Church History topics and videos, and more. We invite you and others interested to learn more about these resources here: history.churchofjesuschrist.org/
To say they were embarrassed by history is a disgrace. The whole history department of the church should have been terminated if that was true. They have an ethical duty to report any information to members. And while we're on the subject, the Saints book series is a disgrace. It glosses over key parts of church history. Even I think the church history department could do better than this.
@@scottbrandon6244 Who said anyone was "embarrassed by history"? The Church's moral duty is to truth. As I mentioned elsewhere, it's not appropriate for the Church to promote any information that isn't known to be true. I don't find Saints to be a problem at all; any historian, when presenting information, has to choose what to emphasize and what to omit, depending on the purpose of relating the history.
Quite honestly, the fact that they have the audacity to say “now you know” at the end of the video baffles me. The church would have looked down on a video like this 10 years ago but all of a sudden now they want to be more transparent. This church is deceiving and like to hide a lot of history. Disgusting
Hypocrisy. Their ever changing narrative.
On the contrary, the Church is using modern technology to conduct historical work and make the information freely available. You can find it all on the Church's web site. That's the opposite of trying to deceive. Some accounts were of questionable credibility before, but now the Church has confidence in them. It's really as simple as that.
@@krismurphy7711 The Church hasn't been forced to do anything. The Church has used the Internet as a tool to make tons of information available--not only quotations, but source documents. If Church leaders had any intent to deceive, they simply wouldn't provide information. But for those who seek understanding from God while learning, there's no problem. If you seek truth, then I wish you the best.
Fortunately I grew up 50 years ago with legendary neighbors that earnestly researched this stuff: Truman Madsen and Susan Easton Black. So since I was tiny, I heard all the stories about this and all the other stuff that still surprises people to this day. But these were the cutting-edge researchers, who were digging and discovering "new" stuff full-time. And even though they published and lectured about all of it, very few people knew it was there to be read or listened to. And even fewer cared enough to actually read and study about it.
Ignorance is always problematic, but I think it's rarely malicious. It's good to see all that info I grew up with starting to finally get more common.
When you are teaching someone to trust revelation how would you do it? It would make sense Joseph would "practice" with seer stones for mundane things as a young man so that when it came time to do the job for real, he could trust what he was seeing. If you just hand someone a strange book and said, this rock will tell you what it says, anyone would look at you funny. But if you had practiced with those stones and learned to trust them, then when someone gave you a record to translate, you could trust what the revelation was telling you. One of the things we can see in the scriptures is that God teaches line upon line. He leads you baby steps at a time. The same was true for Joseph.
This is so true. Joseph Smith had to learn some way. Back then he did not have seminary, the standard works, or any of the other tools we have today. He had the Bible and the culture of his time. He was prepared spiritually to restore the Gospel. I think that some people (both members and non-members) have a hard time with the way it was done, because we like to apply a lot of historical relativism and judge Joseph Smith with our worldview and perspective.
isn't that like divination?
in the age of the internet, i'm excited to see how missionaries teach the church. i hope they receive more complicated questions and speak more of the details.
I think you're missing the point. Seer stones are not important in gaining a testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints. I made the mistake many times on my mission into thinking that stuff like this was important in their conversion unto Christ, when it is really very low on the scale of importance.
Wow this is amazing!!! Growing up in the church you vehemently denied both Joseph smith using the seer stones in a hat and to find lost items as a teenager. Because it directly contradicted the narrative of finding the seer stone with the plates and the logistics of for one actually needing the plates to translate the book of mormon, and how the process happened. When I mentioned the hat the response was and I quote "The plates were too big to fit in a hat"
Joseph translated the plates using "the gift and power of God." I think we just don't know.
The Church really nailed it with this video. Well done!
When I was a young child I had a blanket that comforted me and helped me feel secure. Then I matured and realized I didn't need it anymore. The blanket never really did anything, it was a piece of light green material. I think God understands our nature and psychology. Sometimes we need physical objects to lean on and focus us, until we can progress past it.
I am a faithful priesthood holder and the fire of the Lord Glory, a pleasant protective assuring connection is felt daily...... Sometimes i just wonder how i could perfectly hear and comverse with the Lord as man speaks to man as the prophet Joseph Smith. I have had very scattered occassiona in the temple, or around tbe temple..... Other occassions its morely impressions and feelings....... I wouldnr mind the Lord giving me a Seerstone like the prophet Joseph Smith.....Lol
I thought the urim and thummim were not used in the “translation” of the BoM we have today because they were taken by an angel.
Maybe after the 116 pages were lost by Harris. The entire BM we have today most likely came from a seer stone and top hat. That is what Harris, Emma, Three Whitmers and Cowdery testify.
There’s a lot of comments here saying the Church has tried to hide this stuff. I’ve been a member my whole life and I have known about these stones for as long as I can remember. I didn’t know some people considered them as secret or tabu. Basically this video explains what I already knew from going to Church each week.
Same here. People keep saying "the church" didn't teach it. The lessons are taught by other members of the church who often are not well versed in history or even doctrine. Most of the time they're preparing their lessons an hour before class.
@everyday tenor Some people did and some people didn't, but in past decades the validity of some accounts was not certain; history is always an ongoing study and Church historians have reached a point where they are confident about some subjects enough to publish more.
Where did you hear them? They were not part of correlated curriculum. I have teachers manuals going back to the 1950s and it was not there. You may have had good teachers in institute or seminary but if was not official curriculum. In fact art work and material told another story. Not top hat or seer stones were part of the story. JS never discussed it.
The answer is NO he did not use the seer stone for translation, as described in d&c 26&27 he used the stone in bowls as described as the U&T. The only accredited account says the hat theory is false he did use a so called seer stone as example in a few instances but he never used it to translate as stated by the prophet Joseph Field Smith. Knowing the truth of Mormon History and what sources to trust is important.
For quite some time, Church historians were doubtful about the accounts that mention the seer stone, but that is no longer the case. I'd suggest looking at modern articles on the Church's web site for better understanding.
Some serious mental gymnastics. Wow.
Not hardly, but I always find it interesting that people use an impressive feat--gymnastics--as a pejorative. It tends to feel like those who use the term are mentally sitting on the couch. For my part, I don't mind putting effort into understanding, but this doesn't require much effort at all.
Instructive! I’m glad the church put out videos like these. Sure it is simplified, but that is the point for these TH-cam clips.
Life long "mormon" here, this video is news to me. This is not what we were taught growing up. Why is it all changing? I saw pictures in the Book of Mormon showing Joseph Smith translating the gold plates, but now he didn't. I'm incredibly confused. How could it all be wrong?
It's not changing. There is plenty in Church history that has been available to people who investigated deeply. He did translate the golden plates, originally with some assistance from physical objects. Over the years, some people have been taught more about the translation process, but a lot of the details end up not being particularly meaningful. Here's the question: do you have a testimony from God? If so, then you've learned a bit more about Church history. If not, then what you really need to do is pray to Him, but that was the case anyway.
Because more and more people are finding out the truth with access to history through the internet so now the church has to come out and act as though they have always taught these things and have to dance around the hard facts and explain them so they are believable so people don’t leave the church.
@@jinx3264 The Church isn't acting like they've always taught everything in the same way. It's only in recent years that some historical elements have been considered more reliable and that we have the technology to disseminate the information. There's no dancing around hard facts here, but rather just presentation of them. Concerning belief, I've noticed that belief is very much a matter of choice. Two people can look at the same facts and derive different conclusions from them. For my part, given the answers I've received from God, it's not hard for me to make sense of parts of Church history that confuse of trouble some other people at times. It's clear from the comments on this page that many others take the same approach that I have. I am incredibly blessed, and from my personal experiences in life it's easy to see that it has all come from God, and I'm quite in awe at the great things He is doing through the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Sure, the Church is filled with people who have a great variety of faults, but overall it's amazing. I hope you can soon make sense of the parts of Church history that have troubled you.
The Church keeps the last seer stone that The Prophet Joseph Smith used in the Granite Mountain vault. It has not been used as a seer stone since Joseph Smith used it. But ,it was placed on the Alter in the Celestial room in the Manti Temple when it was first Dedicated. So, Now you know. I also know that Joseph Smith is the Prophet of the Restored Church of Jesus Christ, called the Church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints, and is led today by a true Prophet ,President Russell Marion Nelson.
Do you believe there is only one true prophet today?
Joseph Fielding Smith denied that story about the seer stone and Manti temple in volume three of Doctrines of Salvation.
See, I knew a lot of these stories as a teenager. I'd hear them and ask my parents. My Dad knew a lot about Church History. Back in the day you could get a degree in Church History, and my Grandma had done that while raising her kids, so a lot of it trickled down to my Dad. Whenever I had questions, I was encouraged to ask.
My brother then took a lot of Church History classes at BYU, and would come home and share the stories. Fascinated, I made sure I did too and was greatly inspired by my classes and family to always seek truth and understanding in history. It is honestly only recently that I have realized that my family's passion for history is unique, and that most people these days do not know the amount of Church and American history that my family does. (Seriously, like I know older kids these days that are blindsided when I mention the Civil War happened).
I guess what I'm saying, is all this information was always available (my fav church history professor had published or co-published a lot of books in her field), but the Church has wonderfully gone the extra mile today to make it common knowledge and easily available with videos and The Saints books. I feel like it was a minority in the church who would always be like "hush, we don't talk about those things cause they're different!" And I'd be like "Why? I though different was good?" But having people around with that attitude made some members feel like they weren't supposed to learn or share these things.
It was always Church policy to share history, but the membership grew faster than the resources to get it out there and so it all became....awkward. Thankfully, technology makes it easier than ever to seek out historical documents and accounts!
Thanks for sharing your perspective and experience.
Anthony Sweat at BYU and others have known this theory for years. Many historian said they knew for decades about a top hat and seer stone but did not openly discuss it.
@@scottbrandon6244 For reasons we've mentioned elsewhere.
My husband and I were recently discussing the passage in Abraham 3:25 about how God will "prove us in all things". Upon reflection of this scripture, we realized that as a Church we often talk about this life as "a test" but God through Abraham uses the word "Prove them" not "test them". Why is this significant? Well, because a test would assume that we already have knowledge and God is just "testing' to see what we know and what will we do with what we already know. But to be proven is something different, something more. We are here to prove to God that we will diligently and with much effort even wasting out our lives in search of light and truth for ourselves so that we may act with full knowledge of what is right and then be completely obedient to that knowledge we have obtained through asking and seeking. Since the Restoration and for the last almost 200 years of the Church's existence every President of the Church and Church scholar and historian has always placed the testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his principle scribe Oliver Cowdery as the prominent testimony of translation. It has only really been in the last few years that modern scholars have decided to favor the testimony of others who actually contract the Prophet Joseph Smith. It is apparent that every single Latter -Day Saint has to decide to choose for themselves which of the two narratives if true and which is false. Knowing that God would reveal the truth of all things through his Holy Scriptures, I found the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ himself in section 17 of the Doctrine and Covenants compelling enough that perhaps we as a church should take a second look at the sources and the witnesses for the "stone in the hat theory". The Lord Jesus Christ actually bears his solemn testimony that the Book of Mormon was translated by the Urim and Thummim. In addition to the Savior's testimony, the Lord shows the three witnesses both the plates and the Urim and Thummim and then COMMANDS them to bear testimony of the URIM and THUMMIM. So one has to wonder why the witnesses weren't shown the stone in the hat? Why were they commanded to bear testimony of the Jaredite Urim and thummim given to the Prophet Joseph for the purpose of translating the Nephite record. The answer to this question is also found in Section 17 of the Doctrine and Covenants. The Lord Jesus Christ proclaimed while commanding the three witness to bear WITNESS AND TESTIMONY of the Urim and Thummim: "And this you shall do that my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., may not be destroyed, that I may bring about my righteous purposes unto the children of men in this work". (verse 4). This is significant, very significant. The Lord reveals that a testimony of the Urim and Thummim as the instrument used in translation was ESSENTIAL to obtaining and keeping a testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith and for the Lord to bring about his righteous purposes. Let's think about this for a moment. If you are the devil, and you want to bring down the Lord's servant and stop the progression of the Lord's work what would you do? You take away the urim and thummim! You write a NEW NARRATIVE on translation and you lead people to believe that an inferior rock was used instead of a divine instrument. That is how you destroy faith and testimony. Let's stick with the Revelations of God, the Testimony of the only true witness to the translation who is the Prophet Joseph, and I think we should do some better fact checking on the motives of those like David Whitmer who pushed the idea of a stone in the hat theory instead of a urim and Thummim. There is some untold history there.
Joseph said he used the Urim and Thummim
Joseph Smith History 1: 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 of translating the book.
He did. This is a short video giving a brief explanation.
The seer stones and plates could have worked like AirDrop or Bluethooth technology! If man can come up with something like this today, surely God could have in 1820.
That's so cool that God uses tools that the people know and are familiar with. My question is why couldn't Joseph Smith show anyone else the plates, I understand the problem and its answer now, before I thought Joseph looked suspicious because he never showed anyone else the plates. It seemed convenient that Joseph wouldnt actually have the plates but instead just use a hat and a seer stones, then he could have just lied and said he had plates when he didn't. Otherwise why wouldn't he just translate them directly like anyone else probably would. But now I understand. Thanks for these informational videos.
I would love to know more about Joseph and if he was ever successful doing his treasure digging with the seer stones before God spoke to him.
I'll add that Joseph Smith did show the plates to several others. They are known as the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses. They recorded their testimonies, which are now printed with the Book of Mormon.
Because it is very difficult to show someone gold plates that - in fact - do not exist. But, of course, you already know this Oak & Gray. ;)
@@ozymandias6743 Again, there were multiple people who did see the gold plates and even hefted them, and they never retracted their witness of them.
Question. If the seers stones actually worked then why did he not use them to find the 116 lost pages ? He claimed to be able to use them in finding buried treasure and other lost items, why did it not work for finding something so important when lost? Hmmmmm?
walkonking because maybe it was gods plan for them to be lost. Don’t over think things, there’s a purpose to everything.
He could have retranslated them. The answer to "why not" is in the Doctrine and Covenants.
It just makes it More clarity was a miracle. He used the trim and thummin at times and a seer stone at other times in a completly different ma,er. What matters to me me ultimately is the spirit of peace and "warmth" I feel as I read The Book of Mormon" ican feel that special testifying in and to my soul !,d(now>f was miraculous and divine that that this book exhists and has been made availablee to us in this time. Josephwasdivinaly aidedin ways t&at just strike us modern and apt to lean towards disbelief " natural" men and wmen--even seeming " odd" if we don't step back and ask God for a testimony of the work we are reading and contemplating.
Why did he need the plates though?
Hello brother, i think that the Golden Plates was for strength his own testimony and also of the 3 and 8 witnesses of the Book of Mormon.
It wouldn't make much sense to let people know where the translation came from if he didn't have the plates.
@@henrik6733 If the plates were revealed to him and the witnesses to build their strength, there shouldn't have been a problem for other members to see and help protect them.
@@00Fisher00 People really just need to know and or do two things. First, they should ponder the assertion which has been declared to have come from God, then ask for and receive an answer from God personally letting them know whether it is true or not. Right? With God, logically, both the seer stone and the golden plates, and or any material things from this world, weren't, aren't, and will never be needed.
Nada, One of the commenters made a good point. He said that Joseph may have looked a word or line on the plates then looked at the stone to translate it. Makes sense to me.
I got a question. Why are there pictures all over church buildings dipticing J.S. translating the B.O.M. using the gold plates?
The Book of Mormon was contained on the gold plates. Sometimes depictions are simplified to emphasize basic truths.
@@00Fisher00 basic truth you say. Please answer me why from at least 1980 to 2013 with the pictures of the BOM being translated using the gold plates also being included in the lesson manuals was taught as basic truth. Then in 2013 to 2019 in the Gospel Topic Essays on the church's own website there is now information of basic truth that the BOM was not translated using the gold plates but from looking at a rock in a hat. So those are two very different methods the church has now said as to how the BOM was translated. Which of those are the basic truth? Why was the first translation methodd in the paintings taught for so long and none of the paintings depict the rock in the hat method of translation?
@@Hanleia1 The basic truth is that Joseph Smith used the power and gift of God to translate the plates. The more complex details lie in what methods he used, and from accounts we have available he used more than one method. Some scholars were doubtful about the accounts of the seer stone, but the Church is now making those accounts available online. I'd also guess that not every translation method works well for artwork.
@@00Fisher00 What is the basic truth that the historically-incorrect depictions emphasize? What is this elusive basic truth that cannot be more effectively conveyed by a correct depiction?
@@00Fisher00 "Some scholars were doubtful".... Yeah, and Mike Tyson had "did not always behave with what most people would call traditional dating etiquette".
If God choose to work through seer stones then that is fine by me.
Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
While going through a deviating divorce, I dropped to my knees and asked for help. I asked the lord what I should do with my life and asked 'if I am to marry again please show her to me that I can know I have found the right person'. I have been married to the girl he showed my for almost 10 years and I still have a picture that I drew after I was shown!
This experience may seem unrelated but I have my own witness of God answering prayers regarding who I should marry but also regarding the truthfulness of the book of Mormon as well as many other things.
That's cool
I believe it was.just like Moses .I was thinking of Moses before I watch .very true Joseph Smith was the Prophet of God. The Prophecy of Joseph Smith was on Genesis 49 :22‐26.
Beware of false prophets for many false christs and false prophets shall arise
Christ taught that we "shall know them by their fruits." Some of the fruits of Joseph Smith are true scripture and the restored Church of Jesus Christ.
More like the pope
When people criticize this practice of seer-ship as being occult crystal gazing, I would remind them that they too are looking into a crystal (diode screen) for continual information. Are man's inventions greater than God's?
Seems like the story keeps changing, especially since they can’t keep up with people finding the truth on the internet. None of these was taught to me as a child. We got a sanitized version.
Some people heard about these things decades ago, but history is a hard thing to figure out. It isn't always clear which sources are reliable and which aren't. These days we live in an age where technology enables us to do better research in history work and also to share what is found. The Church has always been cautious about giving information that isn't known to be credible, but now Church historians have a higher degree of confidence in the accounts that describe the seer stone. I think it's great that we're able to learn so much, so easily these days.
I listened to this video for a minute or less and exposed the falsehood easily!!! God didn't speak through any of those objects mentioned they were really just props God used to accomplish His purpose!!! He didn't speak through any of them but He did speak to prophets directly and matter of factly !!! He also spoke through a burning bush, a cloud of smoke and pillar of fire and through His Angels who are messengers !!!
Joseph smith, the seer, revelator and liar of our age. Deceived so many people.
It's easy to call names, but not helpful. Something you should know is that faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ don't rely solely on Joseph Smith's words. We seek our answers directly from God, and when He answers our prayers He never lies to us or deceives us in any way.
I think its hilarious anti mormons trying to convince everyone that Joseph smith, an uneducated farmboy was such a deceptive evil genius who wanted to take over the world with MoRmOnIsM
I used to read palms and tarot cards which basically the same thing as using seer stones. Seer stones were used by occultism in old testament times
Incorrect; supposedly mystical cards are not like what Joseph Smith used. When a prophet does God's work, it's God's work, whether he's using physical objects to help or not. Do you feel that Moses was practicing "occultism" when he performed miracles with a staff or when he held up a brazen serpent to heal people?
Glad the church is letting some of these truths from our history out to the public
Oliver Cowdery wrote:
Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’ (Note after JS-H 1:75, excepted from Letter I, Messenger and Advocate, vol. 1 (October 1834), pp. 14-16, also in History 1834-1836.
A few years latter Oliver Cowdery also testified to a group of people that during the translation their was a curtain between him and Joseph who read off the plates...but when historians examine the records from time of the translation (journal entries and such of people involved) it becomes clear that Oliver lied to people about how the BoM was translated. Their own documents at the time of translation are consistent with this video, not with Olivers later testimony. And yes this was the same seer stone that Joseph used and a teenager in treasure digging activities. There are also several court documents that show young Joseph Smith was convicted of treasure digging and defrauding people of money. The church has made all of these documents available...even the court records and you can look them up online for your self.
@@eeroala5132 No you! You're lying.
Why can't we just be intellectually and morally honest about this? The Book of mormon was largely created by Joseph Smith. It's a book of its day and time. It has some good ideas, concepts, and morals. But it was NOT translated by the power of God.
We can be and are intellectually and morally honest about it. You can ask millions of people about their personal experiences that lead them to know that the Book of Mormon is truly God's word, and they will honestly tell you about it all.
J7, Too much information in the Book of Mormon was not available at that time for him to have been able to write it or even steel it from someone else. Read the book called "Out of Darkness" then go do some research. It will help you a lot understand that he could not have written that book with such limited resources.
Someone having feelings about what they believe is true does not make the book true. You can easily discount its claims with archaeological, biological, and linguistic evidence.
@@Noneofthedays On the contrary, linguistic evidence supports the Book of Mormon, biological evidence is inconclusive, and archaelogical evidence mounts as more is discovered. We don't rely on mere feelings to know of its truth, but rather the power of God through the Holy Ghost.
why would u say that lol braa u must not really understand the book or what it has to do with the bible
“I am Mormon, and a Mormon just believes”
There’s a lot of unbelievable things to believe in mormonism, the seer stone is one of them, but faith helps you accept things like that. The problem I see is the many decades of hiding this information from tithing paying members, missionaries, and investigators through inaccurate art and church manuals. Glad the church is now facing the unstoppable internet.
Latter-day saints don't believe in blind faith. We believe in having a foundation of faith in Jesus Christ and prophets' testimony of Him when the Holy Ghost testifies to us of truth. Faith helps us to know the important things when we don't know everything, and frankly, we never know everything. I've seen people lose a lot because of a few missing answers that they could have had if they had looked a bit further or waited a bit longer until the information was available. When God speaks to our hearts, it's vastly more important than any details we're missing at any given moment.
faith in general is very difficult. The parting of the Red Sea, or a resurrected body, seem just as far fetched as getting a message from a stone in a hat. But, there are many biblical witnesses to these miracles, and many modern witnesses to these miracles.
it can be a very frustrating thing at times, to try to wrap our heads around these miracles.....about Jesus putting mud on a man's eye and receiving sight.......these are very interesting and peculiar claims. But the way that Paul and Peter and Stephen lived their lives, to me, is a testament that there really was substance behind the claims.
The way that the Jews continued on, to me, is a testament to the truth of their records. The way that Cowery, Harris, and Whitmer testified and lived their lives, to me, is an evidence that JS's claims had substance.
@@00Fisher00 faith is blind. That is literally the definition of faith. It's belief without evidence.
@@Rosskoflex It's belief with a different kind of evidence than what we would use in scientific studies or in court, such as the testimony of prophets. God rewards true faith and our faith builds upon that. "Blind" faith implies belief without justification.
👍😉
When the time is right, the Lord reveals all things! To his choosen people.
Moira
From England.
I agree with you and love it!👍♥️😇🙏🌏
Joseph was the best magician of all time. He pulled a whole religion out of his hat.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I'm.all for the God of Israel.God freed from Egypt.why would I want to be guided by Egyptians and their writings. They practice idolatry.they worship other gods.
Only in the power of now we can be connected to God, I can see now why he needed to focus his attention, block distraction to be able to translate. Then he learned how to do it without them.
I'm an LDS Christian (Mormon), and know most folks of my faith are great, loving, compassionate people. Some do, however, have what my nephew recently called a "Superiority Complex". Accurate term. Really interesting how, a bunch of Mormons are freaking out about information posted like this on TH-cam. It's always been there, and has never hurt my testimony. Instead of being judgmental for a bulk of your life, then freaking out when things somehow don't fit your narrative, you probably should have been more compassionate towards other members of the church by following the "Spirit" of the gospel; the Spirit of Christ. For the others this info bothers, its unfortunate, because you were probably raised by 'Superiority Complex' folks in the home and/or in your ward. I apologize, my message is not directed to you and breaks my heart if you were affected by these people. Most were great, but some a$$hole members tried to affect me too growing up. Fortunately for me, it didn't work.
Thank you very much for being blatantly honest.....
For anyone , Christian to have pridefulness and arrogance
It's called being a Pharisee..
And Jesus Christ said terrible things about it.
Even referring to them as pit vipers...
We could call a microscope or a telescope a scrying instrument...
I think that that is a very primitive term... It is somewhat very inappropriate...in prophetic Revelations... For translations under the spirit of God...are holy.
More gaslighting.
What's this about Uma Thurman?
If god could just give Joseph revelation without the use of stones, then why didn’t do it the whole time? What’s the point of any artifact when god could just choose to do miraculous things such as curing people and translating plates?
Do you ask those questions only to express skepticism, or are you really looking for the answers?
You can ask why God used a staff to help Moses, or why He gave Moses the tasks He did in the first place when God could have killed or restrained all of the Egyptians and lifted the Israelites out of Egypt. At some point, God has to balance helping us with letting us do things on our own, like any earthly parent has to do with our children. God could give you revelation to answer your questions in perfect clarity, but it wouldn't suit His purposes to take away the need for us to expend any effort on our part. Another aspect of it is that in order for God to give us something, we often have to actively receive it, and as people we have varying degrees of willingness and ability to do so--even prophets.
The lord loves effort and acts of faith like fasting
The seer stone in the hat was perfectly described at the Peter Whitmer home that had a big window (letting in light) where Joseph was translating. He could pick up right where he left off after a break without anything being read back.
I’ve known this since I was about 8, it’s called reading, great skill.
Can anyone take the time to add in closed captions? I would like to know what this video is being talked about.
Yes, I need all the videos need to be captions and the American Language Sign so the deaf members will know what is being said. Thank You.
Thanks for the feedback. We will pass it along!
I had a thought about the plates not being in direct use. Thinking this out more, what if there were no plates, then it would be difficult to conceptualize a translation of a record that never was. I rather have the plates and they not be in direct use as opposed to not having them at all. How blessed we are to have the Book of Mormon. I found out this was true while I was locked up 20 years ago. I am a totally different person now #blessed
Why does God need any object to do anything? If a prophet can communicate with God already, why use a rock?
God doesn't need anything, but sometimes people do. Why did Moses use a staff? You give people an awful lot of credit if you assume that they're completely capable of everything without any assistance merely because God has told them to do something.
For me the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Is the book true or not? The book tells us how we can know in the same way we can know that God is our Father: that Jesus is the Christ: Is this Church established and organised by the Lord through modern prophets. The Lord knows all things and it’s by the power of the Holy Ghost that personal revelation comes. I have experienced many many times the power and voice of Jesus Christ working and alive in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and indeed continue to do so. I will go to the Lord’s house tomorrow and l know l will experience it again. I feel the Lord speaking to me in the Book of Mormon and other sacred scriptures. This is his work. I am so grateful to know this and how the gospel has blessed my life and the life of my family Thanks and praise be to Our Heavenly Father and our Saviour and for the blessed gift of the Holy Ghost ❤🙏🏻
So were the golden plates in the same room with Joseph and the scribes "?
Most of the time they were under a sheet in a different room
The Church should have made videos like this years ago. Good job Church leaders!!
Thank you for the video. Make things a lot clearer to understand.
Thanks for tuning in and for your comment.
Look up Daniel Peterson on TH-cam. A professor at BYU and he is incredible. Also read 'A case for the Book of Mormon' written by Tad Callister. These two men (with their knowledge) can help anyone navigate BOM/Joseph Smith questions. For example-BOM at 531 pages translated in about 68 days, no notes, no 'readbacks' after breaks, by a man who couldn't write a coherent letter.. Moroni said it best 10:3 (page 529). As it's said doubt your doubts, not what you know.
So the plates and stone are like bluetooth. That's why it wasn't in the same room! ACIENT TECH ALL...
Even the Liahona probably sounded strange for a long time, and yet these days it's so, so normal for someone to look at a handheld device that gives us information. It's a funny but interesting perspective.
All this back and forth about the seer stones and Church History. Few questions you will need to answer for yourself - and I hope God helps you - if you are troubled are:
1. When you read the Book of Mormon, don't you feel the power of the Holy Ghost? Don't you find supernal truths?
2. Jesus Christ had only one Church, if so, where is it? Because quite honestly, and feel free to do your research, if The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is not it, then it simply does not exist.
3. Has the Book of Mormon not delivered what is promised: "..Draw you closer to God.."?
4. Have you not been made to love and respect and honor God more through the 4 standard works?
If your questions to 1,3 or 4 is yes, then do as the Book of Mormon has warned: "...condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless...".
Stand on the truth you know, don't let the devil or his cunning craftiness, through anyone or anything steal your testimony and cause you to murmur against God because of the little failings of a few mortals. If you do, you will only have yourself to blame.
This is exactly what I’m thinking. All these debates about church history and Joseph Smith will go on forever, but at the end of the day a bitter fountain can’t bring forth good water and a good fountain can’t bring forth bitter water. I definitely feel the spirit when reading the BoM
Can you please add closed captions to this video? Thank you!
A lot of them have the captions, I don't know why they failed to put it on this one. Hopefully they will fix that issue.
Yes, please put the closed captions and the American Language Signs on all the videos so we will understand what is being said. The deaf members and the hearing members are alike. as we all are God's children. Thank you!!!!
Thanks for the feedback. We will pass it along!
@@churchofjesuschrist we are still waiting for the captions...
Why are closed captions unavailable? I need to teach this video to our youth in Spanish, and it is not available in that language!
They seem to be reference information through comparsion of writing. Like how the Rosetta stone allowed us to understand hieroglyphs.
They remind me of oracle bones too, and their writing.
Ok, if it was no big deal and a "common" thing to do, then why wasn't it taught commonly in any Sunday School, Seminary, Priesthood or Relief Society class, missionary training, or a general conference talk each year?
If this "spiritual growth" of Joseph Smith was so apparent, significant and a clearly viable lesson to us all, then why wasn't it taught to us all from Primary onward?
Why did I not hear of this "common knowledge" for over a half century?
You think we weren't attending church?!!
It wasn't taught when it wasn't considered to be reliable history. It's only in more recent times that Church historians and leaders have examined some accounts and determined that they were accurate. It's normal for historians to learn more and rethink ideas about the past as they do so.
Hi @Cage SC, thanks for your question. In a 2018 Face to Face event, Elder Quentin Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and several Church historians responded to a similar question about why the Church has not been more open about controversial Church history topics. See their response at 14:18 here: th-cam.com/video/kpLN6AomRQY/w-d-xo.html. Elder Cook and the historians explain that information about challenging Church history or doctrinal questions has been available, but that these topics weren’t always talked about or discussed. This may have been because leaders and teachers were uncomfortable with these topics, but also because the main purpose of Church meetings, including seminary and institute, is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. We also know much more now about these topics than we did 30-40 years ago, and the Church has made a tremendous effort to make its history more accessible and understandable with the publication of the Gospel Topics Essays, the Joseph Smith Papers project, the narrative history, “Saints” and accompanying Church History topics and videos, and more. We invite those interested to learn more here: history.churchofjesuschrist.org/
Funny thing is, Joseph Smith never mentioned a seer stone. Those who mentioned it, did so after the fact they left the church. Hmmm... sounds pretty fishy. Also, why would God have the Nephite prophets prepare a seer stone for Joseph Smith to translate, then have it replaced with a seer stone? It doesn’t make sense at all.
Friday ngt - August 27, 2021.
It seems to have been a mater of convenience as he grew in ability. I think that makes sense. As he became more capable in receiving revelation, he eventually didn't require any object to help him. Church historians used to view accounts of the seer stone with more skepticism, but history work changes with time as we learn more.
July 1993 Ensign has an article by now President Nelson which mentions the seer stone and top hat. There is a book by Neal Maxwell that discusses the seer stone and top hat for translating the BM. So does the gospel topics essays and the book Rough Stone Rolling.
Is it true that Joseph's peep stone looking friend Samuel Lawrence was the one that "saw" the "spectacles" which were later termed as the Urim and Thummim?
Fascinating. Does anyone know where I can find more info about the Reformed Egyptian? I’ve tried researching the internet, but the only place it’s ever mentioned is when referring to Joseph Smith.
I’m hoping for a more fact-based source, rather than just the man that started the religion claiming it’s factual.
Thanks for any help.
To my knowledge it was a written language used specifically for the Book of Mormon, for the sake of more efficient engraving. I don't think it exists anywhere else.
In other words, it’s a made up language.
@@SkinnyMikeD No, it's a language that we don't have many examples of. This is not uncommon. There are many languages which have only been spoken, and some are dying out. Some written languages have very limited remaining examples of usage. It would be kind of fun if we'd had perfect record-keeping ability since the dawn of human existence, but that wasn't the case.
@@00Fisher00 So I am to believe that God invented an entire occult ad-hoc language for Nephi & Co. to chisel into the Gold Plates, which Joseph Smith would later translate into English? And this Egyptian language did not survive in any shape/form on the continent where this 1,000 year civilization lived and died, such that archeologists would never discover evidence of this Egyptian language influence?
@@ozymandias6743 People have invented languages thousands of times over in human history, whether spoken or written. It makes sense that for a most important record, a more durable medium would be used, such as metal plates. If using a medium like that, it also makes sense to write in a language that would be easier to engrave, whereas even if the same written language was used elsewhere, which may or may not have happened, it has often happened that ancient records have been destroyed over time. It's happened more than once that we've only found scant evidence of some ancient languages having existed.
Continued. The next page was one the left opposite to a modern book of which we are familiar. So when the page was turned, it should be going to the right and not to the left.
Nearly all of the Church produce videos about the gold plates of the Book of Mormon have this error
It is just supposed to represent a book. Chill dude. No one is perfect.
I for one do not believe the new narrative that is being foisted upon the Church by modern scholars and historians. It totally contradicts the testimony of Joseph Smith the Prophet and Oliver Cowdery his scribe. No source should be considered more credible than theirs. And yet our modern scholars and intellectuals would rather place their trust and validity in the words of the critics and scoffers than in the words of the Prophets themselves. The most tragic part of this... is that some in Church leadership, correlation dept, curriculum dept, etc. have embraced the scholars over and above the prophets as well.
That’s because Joseph Smith was the only prophet the LDS church has ever had
It's not a contradiction, though. No one but Joseph Smith witnessed the entire translation process. We can piece together what happened by using all of the reliable accounts. It is understandable that Joseph Smith used more than one specific method.
the church put the video out, but it may be that they never add this to their curriculum
Now, I know. Thank you
🎵🎶"Dum dum dum dum dum" 🎶🎵
Are you trying to spell Dumb?
Dictating the book the way he did and seeing how remarkably complex, profound and consistent the text is is beyond human ability. Plain and simple. He could have been hanging upside down by his ears with a mummified yak tongue telling him the words, it wouldn't make the book any more or less credible. The text stands on its own regardless of how it came to be.
The Book of Mormon is truly the most incredible volume of scripture. The only thing I like more is the 4 Gospels that have the account of the mortal life of the Savior in the New Testament. But the Book of Mormon, read, studied and understood in concert with the Bible is truly an incredible book of testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ, doctrine, principles and prophecy.
Totally agree!! When you know the book is true, you know it was translated thru power given of God. Doesn't matter HOW it was translated.
That’s a pretty strong statement to make and one I held for most my life. That’s is until I started researching writers and the various methodology they used. It was absolutely within reason that Joseph could have made the book up. I’d suggest you do more research before making such a statement in the future. Remember knowledge is power.
@@muzzle8744 When God testifies to us, we're pretty confident in what He tells us.
So I have a family member that claims he was given a seer stone from Jesus. I’m thinking he’s going crazy. Can anyone get a seer stone? I always thought that only a Prophet could have one. Any thoughts?
Very unlikely. But that is something your family should pray and discuss about.
He used a stone.
To do what?
Did he Seer the BoM, or Translate it?
Is there a difference?
Miraculous? Then why are we told he stared at gold plates. He never once read from the plates.
This video attempts to confuse rather than clarify for the relief of valid concerns. It is endorsed by the Church. The church knows this video is misleading.
What does this tell you about the church?
Your statement that "he never once read from the plates" is unfounded and incorrect. He translated by the gift and power of God. If you study the available accounts, it appears that he used more than one specific method over time. The video is not misleading; it is briefly informative, and anyone who wants to learn more can follow the link in the video's description. What that tells me about the Church is that the Church is doing what it can to inform people at the level of their interest.
I am grateful for the called of the prophet Joseph Smith, he is the prophet of this last dispensation.
Nah. The last prophet was Jesus
@@Sirach144 Jesus taught otherwise. He knew there would be both true and false prophets in the latter days, which is why He taught that we would know prophets "by their fruits".
Sorry nothing can make this credible to me. He used the stones prior for treasure digging.
Genuine knowledge from God makes anything credible, if we seek and receive it. Do you deny that? Quite a few people have studied Joseph Smith's history in detail and have a lot of insight into what occurred in his life, and we understand how these things happen. You can also, if you desire.
The church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints.
A seer stone reminds me of the stones that the brother Jared had Jesus Christ tuch with his finger to light the darkness in the way so they could be seen in the dark by the ones guiding the holy Ghost to , be as Jesus be , and not wait but move on to a new and everlasting covenant from blood sacrifice.
The stones that Jesus Christ touched is a big conversation to dispensation and it is now no different from the original to finding out why by , what takes place from temple teachings.
awesome! clear and simple!
In this depiction, notice that when Joseph is using a scribe and a rock in a hat, the plates are no where in sight.
Unlike regular methods, Joseph Smith's translation process relied on revelation, and it didn't always require him to look directly at the plates. From the accounts we have, it seems that sometimes he didn't.
My mobile or tablet needs to be used in the shade otherwise it's not easy to read messages.
The Liahoma and stones are from The Lord
Do you believe what Oliver says here:
"I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) ... as he [Joseph] translated it by the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim"
If this is true, then the other witnesses of the translation process were there only for "a few pages". And if this is true, then the far bulk of the translation was done with the U&T.
Do you believe what Joseph says here:
"Moroni, who deposited the plates in a hill in Manchester, Ontario county, New York, being dead and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me, and told me where they were, and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them, and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates; and thus came the Book of Mormon."
All of the witnesses that say Joseph only used a seer stone in a hat left the church. Hmm. But show me any quote by Joseph or Oliver where they say other than the above.
Show me anyone who witnessed every aspect of the process and recorded it all, and then things will be clear. Until then, we have partial accounts from different people. That's how history works pretty much all the time. There are a lot of little things that make understanding the complete process difficult; for example, even Oliver Cowdery wasn't visibly watching Joseph the whole time the translation was going on. Also, it's possible that Oliver or others could have used "Urim and Thummim" in a general sense to refer to the seer stone, because those names are used sometimes in that way. I couldn't say definitively that he did, but there are all sorts of little things that make it easy to misunderstand. Many of those details really aren't particularly important.