Now the Urim and Thummim is forbidden?

Even the term "Urim and Thummim" is being de-correlated.

It was one thing for our scholars to ignore what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation when they wrote the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation. 

While it seems unthinkable that such an essay would not begin with quoting what Joseph and Oliver said, and even more unthinkable that the essay would completely ignore what they said (apart from a few misleadingly truncated excerpts), at least the essay used the term itself (although in a misleading way).

https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/2022/09/analysis-gospel-topics-essay-on-book-of.html

The latest trend seems to be to ban the term itself.

For example, Elder Nash spoke at Scripture Central's "Moroni Day" i September 2024 and misrepresented what Joseph supposedly "referenced."

17:15 please note the following. without punctuation without strikeouts this was dictated word by word as he used what he referenced as to as the spectacles, at  times the searstone, [except Joseph never "referenced" or said he used a seer stone] using a hat to Shield his eyes from extraneous light in order to plainly see the words as they appeared

https://youtu.be/Oy8j4u97bso?t=1050 

_____

On the Come Back podcast, Casey Griffiths (BYU professor) again edits Oliver Cowdery's statement to avoid using the term Urim and Thummim and interpreters:

Original Source (omitted text in red)	Griffiths’ version
I wrote with my own pen the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet as he translated it by the gift and power of God by means of the Urim and Thummim, or as it is called by that book, holy interpreters.   I beheld with my eyes and handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was translated.   I also beheld the Interpreters.   That book is true.   Sidney Rigdon did not write it.   Mr. Spaulding did not write it.	I wrote with my own pen the entire Book of Mormon save a few pages as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph Smith as he translated by the gift and power of God       I beheld with my eyes and handled with my hands the gold plates from which it was transcribed       That book is true

https://youtu.be/bshmVO3Mr4o?t=2181

The Interpreter's Witnesses film

The Interpreter Foundation is promoting its latest film, Six Days in August. 

https://witnessesfilm.com/

Because I don't live in Utah or Idaho, I haven't seen it.

Let's hope it is more faithful and historically accurate than their Witnesses film.

In the pursuit of charity, we assume everyone at the Interpreter acts with good intentions. They are certainly entitled to believe whatever they want, and they can promote their beliefs freely. 

In the pursuit of understanding, we seek to understand their reasoning and we have no compulsion to change their minds. It seems like they are trying to reconcile and rationalize what David Whitmer said about the translation (SITH, or the stone-in-the-hat narrative) by converting SITH into a faithful narrative.

That's the most charitable explanation I can think of. If someone has a better explanation, send it to me at lostzarahemla@gmail.com.

In the process, though, the Interpreter ignores what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation. As Joseph himself explained, "as plain as word can be," when he responded to ongoing confusion about the translation, in the Elders Journal in 1838.

Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the Book of Mormon?

Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the Book of Mormon   was translated, 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.

(Elders’ Journal I.3:42 ¶20–43 ¶1)

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/11 

In the pursuit of clarity, we note that those who watched Witnesses may recall its portrayals of SITH, which are bizarre and counter-historical, to say the least. The film teaches that Joseph and Oliver misled everyone about the translation of the Book of Mormon, for example. It misrepresents David's trip to Fayette, omits the encounter with the messenger taking the plates to Cumorah, and much more.

_____

Here are some stills from the movie to give you an idea.

They spent about 3 full minutes relating the goofy narrative attributed to Martin Harris, which wasn't published until years after his death, and was based on a conversation he had with Edward Stevenson on the train to Utah. Shortly before the trip, Martin had fallen in a field and was delirious. Whether the stone-swapping account was the product of a dream, a delusion, or an actual memory is impossible to tell, of course, but the narrative never made sense.

And yet, to the scholars at the Interpreter, Martin's stone-swapping story is so important that it consumes 3 minutes with lots of shots on different locations, all in a film that is only 103 minutes long.

Look at these stills to get an idea of how ridiculous the whole narrative is.

Here the Interpreter scholars present their own narrative that repudiates what Joseph and Oliver always said about the origin of the Book of Mormon. Neither of them ever once stated or implied that Joseph used anything other than the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates.

Joseph using SITH to produce the Book of Mormon. We wonder what purpose the screen served if the plates were covered and the Urim and Thummim was not being used.

Martin Harris finds a rock by the river

Martin Harris puts the rock in his pocket

Martin Harris swaps his river rock for the "seer stone" that supposedly provided the words for Joseph to read.

Joseph Smith is supposedly duped by Martin Harris' river rock

One of the craziest parts of the film appears near the end.

This endorsement of David Whitmer's honesty was published a year after his pamphlet An Address to All Believers in Christ, in which David Whitmer related SITH, claimed Joseph was a fallen prophet, that there was never any Priesthood restoration, etc.

Anyone can read that pamphlet here:

https://latterdaytruth.org/pdf/100023.pdf

Not surprisingly, the SITH sayers are fond of quoting this pamphlet for David Whitmer's account. Few LDS realize what else David claimed in the pamphlet.

While we give the Interpreter the benefit of the doubt and are fine with them believing and promoting whatever they want, we also recognize that the whole SITH narrative is an appalling refutation of what Joseph and Oliver clearly taught.

But it's all in fun, apparently, for our popular LDS scholars.

SITH in federal court

SITH (the "stone-in-the-hat" narrative about the translation that refutes what Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery always said about the translation), is now being litigated at the appellate level in federal court.

As if SITH wasn't bad enough from a purely historical perspective.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2024/09/25/lds-tithing-church-lawyers-push/

(click to enlarge)

The media often uses this photo of the "seer stone" that doesn't match the description Emma and David gave, and can't be the one that Wilford Woodruff claimed was the Urim and Thummim in Nauvoo anyway (assuming the narrative that this is the one Oliver Cowdery had is true, which is questionable given the poor chain of custody). 

Notice the fine print under the image: "(Rick Bowmer | The Associated Press) A picture of the "seer stone," shown in 2015, that Latter-day Saints believe church founder Joseph Smith used to help translate the Book of Mormon."

There are at least a few Latter-day Saints who still believe what Joseph and Oliver taught, such as Joseph's statement here:

I obtained them [the plates] and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the Book of Mormon.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/10

Neither Joseph nor Oliver ever once said or implied that Joseph used a seer stone.

And yet, in federal court, the Church's own lawyer questioned what Joseph and Oliver said:

“Isn’t that a bizarre thing to say?” the church’s lead lawyer said of the plaintiffs. “They say specifically, ‘We don’t dispute that the Book of Mormon is true. We don’t dispute that it was translated by the gift and power of God. We dispute whether it was translated using the Urim and Thummim, a clear stone or an opaque stone.

“That almost sounds silly,” he continued. “Churches have the right to define, develop and evolve their own history. ... Who knows what happened in 1820 or whether he sat at a table and looked at gold plates?”

Think how different this would all be if LDS scholars had stuck with what Joseph and Oliver (and their successors in Church leadership) had said. 

But instead, the scholars decided Mormonism Unvailed, David Whitmer, and Emma's dubious "Last Testimony" have more credibility than Joseph and Oliver.

For a discussion of the SITH problem, see

https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/p/the-sith-problem-1829-2024.html

The whole thing is an absurd mess, partly because of Rough Stone Rolling and John Dehlin's "Faith Crisis Report" that led to the Gospel Topics Essay on Book of Mormon Translation which doesn't even quote what Joseph and Oliver said.

And of course we have the famous scholars at Scripture Central and the Interpreter continuing to promote the SITH nonsense.

Thanks, Dan and Jack.

More later...

SITH sayers omit testimony of U&T

The website "witnesses of the book of Mormon" (https://witnessesofthebookofmormon.org/) is produced by the Interpreter Foundation and lists FAIRLDS and Scripture Central as "contributors."

Of course, all three of those organizations are SITH sayers, meaning they teach people to reject what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation because they want people to accept the SITH statements in Mormonism Unvailed, by David Whitmer, and the dubious "Last Testimony of Sister Emma." 

They have a page on John Whitmer that collects his known statements.

https://witnessesofthebookofmormon.org/eight-witnesses/john-whitmer/statements/

However, they omitted John Whitmer's statement about the plates and the translation that he gave during an interview with Zenas Gurley.

The speaker visited John Whitmer at Far West a few years ago. He is now dead; was then seventy years old. [John Whitmer died at Far West, Mo., on July 11, 1878.] He had seen the plates; and it was his especial pride and joy that he had written sixty [sixteen?] pages of the Book of Mormon. His neighbors all gave him a good character. He left the Church in 1837 or 1838, because of tendencies he could not approve; but had always remained true to the faith. When the work of translation was going on he sat at one table with his writing material and Joseph at another with the breast-plate and Urim and Thummim. The latter were attached to the breast-plate and were two crystals or glasses, into which he looked and saw the words of the book. The words remained in sight till correctly written, and mistakes of the scribe in spelling the names were corrected by the seer without diverting his gaze from the Urim and Thummim.”[1]

Fortunately, we're not required to accept the theories of the SITH sayers. We can all read the original, published testimonies from Joseph and Oliver about the translation, in which they taught that Joseph translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates.

Now we can also see that John Whitmer, despite his problems with the Church, retained his testimony that corroborated and validated what Joseph and Oliver always said about the translation.

---

[1]https://archive.org/details/TheSaintsHerald_Volume_26_1879/page/n369/mode/2up

Counterproductive LDS SITH apologists

Maybe LDS historians, apologists, and other intellectuals should try supporting, corroborating, and teaching what Joseph and Oliver taught about the origin and setting of the Book of Mormon instead of trying to persuade Latter-day Saints that Joseph and Oliver were wrong, misled everyone, and should be ignored in favor of the theories of modern LDS scholars.

_____

Richard Bushman's original interview on translation on Steven Harper's "CES Letters" podcast from a month ago has almost 1,000 views:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAAKV1JDBHk

John Dehlin's 3+ hour episode from 2 days ago critiquing that interview because it confirms Runnels' "CES Letter" has almost 50,000 views:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T13dVy3izM

Plus, as Dehlin points out, everyone who watches Harper's channel is driven towards the CES Letter.

_____

Dehlin "SITH was one of the top three reasons"

In an August 2024 podcast about the CES Letter, John Dehlin says "we did a study of 3,000 ex Mormons to try and understand why so many people were leaving the church. Seer stone in the Hat was one of the top three reasons." 2:09:33

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T13dVy3izM

The entire video offers examples of the impact of SITH on Latter-day Saints.

Main points:

2 excerpts:

The ridiculous nature of SITH:

1:07:27 this whole story is so ridiculous when when you dig into it... He is conceding the

whole story of the rock that is just found accidentally is more advantageous evidently than using what God preserved for 2,000 years... 

It doesn't make sense in the worldview of Mormonism that God would preserve both the plates and the medium to translate... That's why he's saving them. These are the way you're going to be able to translate these plates. So you got to have those spectacles in that box

since 400 AD. There's those spectacles been in that box for Joseph to use to translate and then he doesn't need anything in the Box... 

Stephen Harper's "CES Letters" site as an introduction to the original CES Letter.

(referring to https://www.cesletters.org/)

30:03 so Heraldo is recommending if you've got believing family and friends and you don't want to send them the CES letter, right, send them the CES letters and and that'll be a great 

introduction to the CES letter, by showing them CES letters because hey Richard bushman's on it.

Yes, yes, yeah and lots of BYU people and good things so it's safe, right?

CES Letters - BofM Translation by Harper, etc.

Some LDS scholars have created a website to address the CES Letter. 

https://www.cesletters.org/about

As we've come to expect, they promote SITH.

Their opening page features the absurd depiction of Joseph staring into his hat, which contradicts what Joseph and Oliver always said.

The text box uses the truncated excerpt from the Preface to the 1830 Book of Mormon that the SITH sayers typically use. (See the Gospel Topics Essays, the Joseph Smith Papers, etc.)

[See, e.g., https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/2024/08/joseph-smith-papers-intro-to-vol-1.html]

If you go to their site, you'll see they don't quote what Joseph and Oliver said.

https://www.cesletters.org/book-of-mormon-translation

Here's the excerpt in context:

I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God, and caused to be written, one hundred and sixteen pages, the which I took from the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon.

We see here that Joseph "took" the translation from the plates, not from a stone in the hat.

But these scholars will never point that out because it contradicts their SITH narrative. Nor will they inform readers that Joseph wrote the Preface to refute the SITH claim of Jonathan Hadley, which Hadley published in Palmyra in August 1829. Hadley's claim was widely circulated, as Joseph noted in the first line of the Preface.

To the Reader—

As many false reports have been circulated respecting the following work, and also many unlawful measures taken by evil designing persons to destroy me, and also the work, I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God, and caused to be written, one hundred and sixteen pages, the which I took from the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon… thou shalt translate from the plates of Nephi, until ye come to that which ye have translated, which ye have retained…

For more detail, go to this article and the previous one it cites:

https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/2023/10/update-on-jonathan-hadley-and-sith.html