- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I saw that… and subsequently deleted my duplicate tread after seeing this one 
IMO this is a big step forward. The Ensign enjoys more readership than an unannounced essay on lds.org.
They’ve even got a picture of the chocolate colored (wanted to say chocolate covered) seer stone in the article.
Wow! Robin Jensen, one of the contributors of this article was my trainer on my mission. Couldn’t have asked for a better trainer. I’ll never forget my first day when he asked me if I wanted to anoint my bike with oil to consecrate it for my mission. Then started laughing when I gave him a confused look. Or, when we knelt down for our first companion prayer and he started praying to Joseph Smith, then started laughing. 😆 He’s a great guy, with a great sense of humor. Glad to see that this article is more open than most, and even includes some of the various artists depictions of how they perceive the translation process, rather than just the image that we typically see of JS translating directly from plates. Good stuff!After my surprise at the date subsided (I didn’t know I was able to see the future! 
I love the fact that they place the traditional pictures in context – and that they show that the traditional pictures are not lies but merely misapplied. I have said that such an understanding is important, since Joseph did talk about copying some characters from the plates, for example, but the picture then was mistakenly used as a translation scene. This is not a little step, especially being published in the Ensign.
Holy Cow wrote:Wow! Robin Jensen, one of the contributors of this article was my trainer on my mission. Couldn’t have asked for a better trainer. I’ll never forget my first day when he asked me if I wanted to anoint my bike with oil to consecrate it for my mission. Then started laughing when I gave him a confused look. Or, when we knelt down for our first companion prayer and he started praying to Joseph Smith, then started laughing.
😆 He’s a great guy, with a great sense of humor. Glad to see that this article is more open than most, and even includes some of the various artists depictions of how they perceive the translation process, rather than just the image that we typically see of JS translating directly from plates. Good stuff!
consecrated oil can stop the squeak in a chain if it is all you have (you already put your hands on the bike and pray)
My family came to me showing me this article they saw on facebook. They wanted to know if I had seen it. They started asking me questions about seer stones and the different paintings. I appreciated the Ensign making this a safe thing to talk about without me sounding wierd or misinformed…instead…I was able to talk about it with them today well informed with stuff I had read several years ago and now the church is sharing it openly.
It was a good experience for my family. I appreciate the church doing this.
I’m definitely following this thread. It wasn’t a good experience – at least not initially – in our house. My seventeen-year-old was exasperated. Another weird thing to explain to herself and her non-member friends who appear, at least to her eyes, to have a more appealing and simple faith. I’ll read through the article with her today. Your advice welcome.
🙂 Ann, the seerstone, to me, can be viewed as a physical aid to be used in divine communication. It’s what made sense to him because of the times he lived in. People do a lot of things when trying to commune that might seem odd when viewed by someone else:
– using a rosary
– removing a hat
– closing our eyes
– facing Mecca
– folding our arms
– lighting a candle
– burning incense
– kneeling at the bedside
– holding a bible during prayer
In Judaism, reading from a specific scroll has been important… it’s not just the words, but the scroll itself that has a role.
We go to locations that provide sacred context, mosque, chapel, temple, cathedral to enhance our ability to connect to another realm.
In the sacrament, communion, Lord’s Supper, you know it is really just bread and water/wine, but they are also physical elements that help our frame of mind because we have decided for it to be that way.
If I feel that I am able to communicate with God better if I pray in the woods, then that’s what I will do if I really need an answer.
Like all those elements, JS’s seerstone can be viewed as an object to help him focus, but the subject is still communication.
Ann, sorry to hear it is causing your daughter some angst. My advice is to go to LDS.org with her, and show her how to search for topics. Enter in: Urim and Thummim
Quote:An ancient instrument or tool prepared by God and used by Joseph Smith to aid in the translation of the Book of Mormon. God provided a Urim and Thummim to His prophets in ancient times (see Exodus 28:30; 1 Samuel 28:6; Ezra 2:63).
REad the scriptures quoted with her.
Hopefully, this takes away the weirdness factor as if it surrounded Joseph Smith, and instead teaches something about religion and God…throughout history…uses tools and always has. Moses spoke to a burning bush…these things seem to be common and accepted when we have heard the stories. It is just the shock of not hearing this about the Book of Mormon translation process very much.
In fact, to some faithful people, the fact Joseph used something that is referenced in the Old Testament is pretty cool…and validates his prophetic calling. Whether he knew about it from prior study of the Old Testament, or just was doing things and later found them consistent with the restorationist actions he was involved in, validated (albeit skeptically) by scripture…either way…it is a good thing it is in line with the bible stories, in my opinion.
This is religion. Few religions have the benefit of the LDS experience to see it develop in our backyard with prophets, scripture and revelation. The other religions read the scripture from long ago…and whatever the process to bring it about isn’t ever in question because it always was there. But Mormonism can be scrutinized for how the revelation and scripture is coming forth. I find it fascinating it actually is in line with so many bible stories of how things work.
I would think any friends who say something about it should be reminded, like OON mentioned, all religions have it. I think it is good if you can prepare her to know she might respond…and then remind her she may never have any friends actually hear about it or care enough to bring it up, most likely.
Ok, allow me to be devil’s advocate for a minute in presenting why this might be troubling to some orthodox Mormons. I took some liberties with the following completely fictional dialogue exchange. On Own Now wrote:In the sacrament, communion, Lord’s Supper, you know it is really just bread and water/wine, but they are also physical elements that help our frame of mind because we have decided for it to be that way.If I feel that I am able to communicate with God better if I pray in the woods, then that’s what I will do if I really need an answer.Like all those elements, JS’s seerstone can be viewed as an object to help him focus, but the subject is still communication.
Orthodox Member :”Except, our church is different because it is founded upon actual golden plates, the record of an actual ancient civilization, and it was translated nearly word for word from the original by the gift and power of God.”
Detractor: “But, JS used a seer stone (that he had found while digging a well and that he may have used in earlier treasure digging expeditions) to translate a good portion of the BoM. According to some accounts, the plates do not even appear to have been in the same room during the translation. To translate he would put the stone in a hat and put his head in the hat to drown out the light in a séance like format. Joseph would repeat the words that he saw lit up on the stone. What is the purpose of such painstaking labor to create and preserve the plates at all if they were so superfluous to the translation process? Did Joseph’s magical stone really produce lighted words or is it more likely that these words came somehow to/through/from the mind of JS.”
“That is not all! Joseph had more stones and talismans in his possession upon his death. What is the difference between this new understanding of JS and a turn of the century, backwoods, voodoo shaman? One of these stones has been squirrelled away in the secret Mormon vault all these years and rarely seen, never photographed until recently. Your church does not want you to know the truth.”
Orthodox Member: “Lies all lies! Depart from me spawn of Satan!”
Apologist: “Actually – although I would disagree with his tone and conclusions – many of the things this guy is saying are true and can be found in this October’s edition of the Ensign. I am surprised that you did not know about them earlier since the church has never tried to hide any of these things. This is really no big deal. Maybe God used a folk magic tool that JS was familiar with to produce a miracle. Lots of churches use ordinary items for sacred purposes. What is important is not how the BoM came forth but rather the message of Christ found within its pages. Read the BoM more and pray for faith and everything will work out.”
Orthodox Member: “Huh?!?!?!”
😮 😯 :wtf: 
“Upon this rock, I will build my church,” indeed. I did a post eons ago about the significance of rocks in Mormonism and what a rock is:
http://mormonmatters.org/2008/08/20/is-the-internet-a-urim-thummim/ A few thoughts there, but here’s an inventory of some rocks:
– Brother of Jared sees the finger of God touching sixteen stones to make light for the barges
– Urim & Thummim
– Peter’s name is change to “Cephas” or stone
– Jesus says “upon this rock I will build my church” – we say that means the rock of revelation, but Catholics say it means the “rock” of Papal authority (Peter = rock = first pope)
– the “new name” is written on a white stone (in Revelation)
– the earth will become a “crystal” / urim & thummim
Now, seer stones. Rock on.
I believe strongly that the best way to teach the oddities of Mormon history is to teach history. Things that seem odd in isolation look much less weird in historical context.
If you guys didn’t see it, Richard Bushman wrote up a bit on BCC about this. http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/08/05/on-seerstones/ He said a few things that might be helpful: “Why then does the picture of a brown, striated stone trouble us? I think because it crosses a boundary we had held on to between religion and superstition. We have known about the gold plates and the angel and the Urim and Thummim long enough to assimilate them into respectable religion. Those are the ways of God. On the other side of the boundary are witchcraft and spells and tarot cards. Those are silly superstitions that the benighted believe in. We want none of that.” Worth a read.
I liked this most recent article for the most part, I did take issue with some of their reasoning surrounding the “misleading” illustrations: Quote:Each artistic interpretation is based upon its artist’s own views, research, and imagination, sometimes aided by input and direction from others.
Many people have heard the stories and the myths of Del Parson’s painting of Jesus. There’s a site that attempts to dispel Mormon myths:
http://mormonmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/09/del-parson-painting-is-accurate.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://mormonmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/09/del-parson-painting-is-accurate.html Del Parson wrote:In 1983 the Church talked to me about painting a portrait of the Savior. They requested that the painting portray Christ as a strong, masculine figure. They also said I should paint Him with blue eyes and auburn hair. The portrait, which was titled The Lord Jesus Christ, was part of a series of three paintings that the Church requested. The other two that were painted in this series were Jesus Washing the Apostles’ Feet and Jesus at the Door.
Quote:The sketch process took five months. During that time Del used three different models, but each sketch was rejected by the Curriculum Committee. Eventually a sketch was approved. The painting that followed took nine days to complete, and after two more changes it was accepted. It has been used by the Church worldwide for roughly 25 years.
Whether that’s reputable information or not is beside the point. My point is that this description fits the typical commissioned artist narrative. Someone pays an artist to create a painting and the artist isn’t done until the person that commissioned the artwork is completely satisfied.
Grant Romney Clawson confirmed that the LDS church (no names, just a faceless entity) asked him to remove the wings from angels and lengthen Jesus’ hair in Harry Anderson’s painting of the second coming.
Fairly recently there was controversy over edits made to Carl Heinrich Bloch’s “The Resurrection” that appeared in the December 2011 Ensign.
No big deal I suppose, this is how commissioned artwork works. When the author of the article writes:
Quote:Each artistic interpretation is based upon its artist’s own views, research, and imagination, sometimes aided by input and direction from others.
I question. I question because of the stories I’ve heard over the years where the artist had to go back to the drawing board (pun) to appease GAs and get their work past the correlation department.
Artist: Ta-da.
GA: Hmmmm.
Artist: What?
GA: I do like it…
Artist: But?
GA: Well. I’m not a big fan of the stone. Could you replace that with… nothing. Yes, nothing would be good. Oh, and I’m going to have to ask you to leave your temple recommend on the corner of my desk on your way out.
:angel: :angel: :angel: Ok, that’s a joke but I’m sure there are some people that have fallen victim to less informed leaders that made all kinds of assumptions about people mentioning the rock in a hat version of events.
Back to the quote. What the author describes here doesn’t sound like commissioned artwork at all. It sounds more like an artist that is painting purely for the love of painting and the church later purchases the painting because they like it and feel like it is an accurate depiction of events. Maybe none of the official BoM translation illustrations were commissioned, I don’t know.
The explanation also pokes holes in some people’s opinion that information about the seer stone was well known to all that put forth any effort. If the artists focused all their research efforts on the subject of the BoM translation in order to create an accurate painting and came away with those depictions then what chances did the average member have? I know the “you should have known” argument isn’t official, universal, or even a very good one, I just felt like poking holes.
My gut tells me that the explanation should be put in the oven and baked a little longer. No need to toss the artists under the bus, if the artists were commissioned there’s no reason why the views, research, and imagination couldn’t be owned by people that commissioned the work.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.