Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Public forum for topics that don't fit into the other categories.
User avatar
bridget_night
Posts: 881
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:15

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by bridget_night » 17 Mar 2015, 12:45

Thanks lookinghard. I agree on what you said on that quote about mother Theresa and what I think Hugh B. Brown is right! What scernario were you thinking?

Roy
Posts: 6217
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by Roy » 17 Mar 2015, 12:51

In perhaps an overly simplistic summary - questions are appropriate as long as they are not challenging. I can have a question as long as the answer to the question fits into the approved framework or if the probable answers do not fit into the framework that I am willing to shelve the questions and the answers in faith that the more faith promoting answers are out there and will be revealed at the proper time.

Doubts are questions unrestrained.

I remeber some GA saying that all ex mormon stories have the same element about determining to look at the evidence without prejudice or faithful bias. He equated this to looking at the evidence without the aid of the Holy Spirit. For some doubt is the equivalent of "follow the evidence." (CSI reference)
LookingHard wrote:Having said that, when I think of doubt, I think of Mother Teresa. Ten years after her death in 1997, with the publication of some of her letters, the world was surprised (and shocked) to learn that she was haunted by doubts. In one of her letters, she even admitted to doubting the existence of God. Eventually she came to grips with her doubts; but as far as we know, she died with them. Serious doubts and good works can coexist in the same person.
I believe that profiling non-lds role models in sunday school would be very helpful. We could honor them for the good and praisworthy but not be so hamstrung by leader worship and assumptions of infallability. It could be a necessary baby step towards analyzing our own cultural assumptions.
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2950
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by LookingHard » 17 Mar 2015, 13:00

bridget_night wrote:Thanks lookinghard. I agree on what you said on that quote about mother Theresa and what I think Hugh B. Brown is right! What scernario were you thinking?
I think Nibbler mentioned HBB
nibbler wrote:I can envision one scenario in which Hugh B. Brown is still correct. :angel:

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2950
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by LookingHard » 17 Mar 2015, 18:19

If you read the comments on this Meridian - Broken Down on the Road to Zion I bet you can tell which response is mine. It stands out like a sore thumb. It really feels like the person that wrote this has not had a faith transition and we can't even understand each others words.

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2950
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by LookingHard » 18 Mar 2015, 04:49

And then this morning they have a Looking into the Urim and Thummim where they say, "There are several versions of the Urim and Thummim mentioned in the scriptures. The one used by Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon and receive revelation" and "Joseph Smith depended on the Urim and Thummim until he completed the translation of the Book of Mormon, then “he did not use the stone anymore."

It is just frustrating to see another layer of whitewash being applied.

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16852
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by Curt Sunshine » 18 Mar 2015, 05:42

I would have to read the whole thing to see if that is whitewash or factually correct. (I tried the link, but it wouldn't open.)

The wording you quoted could be correct or incorrect, depending on the rest of the description, since his account says he did use it while dictating the Book of Mormon.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 4520
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 07:34
Location: Ten miles west of the exact centre of the universe

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by nibbler » 18 Mar 2015, 06:41

The article isn't a publication of the church (at least I didn't see a CoJCoLDS stamp, I don't know what ldsmag is though), it's written by Larry Barkdull and that might be more of a reflection of his belief than the official position of the church. It might not be a whitewash so much as it is someone writing up an article that supports their beliefs.

The first quote:
The one used by Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon and receive revelation was the ancient Urim and Thummim used by the Brother of Jared.
Cites the bible dictionary as it's source. The relevant part:
There is more than one Urim and Thummim, but we are informed that Joseph Smith had the one used by the brother of Jared ... Joseph Smith used it in translating the Book of Mormon and in obtaining other revelations.
The Bible Dictionary could stand a nice overhaul.

The second quote:
For example, Joseph Smith depended on the Urim and Thummim until he completed the translation of the Book of Mormon, then “he did not use the stone anymore.”
Cites David Whitmer's All Believers. I haven't read his source but what's interesting is that he clarifies; early sections of the D&C were received through the U&T but later sections weren't. He didn't feel the need to show how JS depended on the U&T to translate the BoM, it was enough for him to go off of the dates of some sections in the D&C.

I may be wrong but my haze of a memory tells me that the official account has JS translating the original 116 pages of the BoM via the U&T but not using it when translation recommences.
Cure sometimes, treat often, comfort always.
— Hippocrates

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 7317
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by DarkJedi » 18 Mar 2015, 06:55

LookingHard wrote:And then this morning they have a Looking into the Urim and Thummim where they say, "There are several versions of the Urim and Thummim mentioned in the scriptures. The one used by Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon and receive revelation" and "Joseph Smith depended on the Urim and Thummim until he completed the translation of the Book of Mormon, then “he did not use the stone anymore."

It is just frustrating to see another layer of whitewash being applied.
I guess I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. It's Meridian Magazine, which is not an official publication but I understand does have a fairly wide readership.

So are you saying the article is incorrect and Joseph did use the urim and thummim (and/or seer stone) after completing the BoM? I guess I'm not understanding what you're seeing as being whitewashed.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

Roy
Posts: 6217
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by Roy » 18 Mar 2015, 10:06

nibbler wrote:I may be wrong but my haze of a memory tells me that the official account has JS translating the original 116 pages of the BoM via the U&T but not using it when translation recommences.
That is my memory as well. The U&T were not returned to JS by the angel Moroni when he returned the plates. JS continued the translation with his brown seer stone that he had previously found while digging a well. I understand that JS and some of his contemporaries had misused the term U&T to refer to the brown seer stone.

I cut and pasted the following from old threads:
"Great and Marvelous are the Revelations of God" by Gerrit Dirkmaat of the Church History Department.

"He also applied the term (Urim and Thummim) to other stones he possessed, called "seer stones" because they aided him in receiving revelations as a seer. The Prophet received some early revelations through the use of these seer stones."
The following link is to FAIRMormon and has many sources and the translation process of the BOM:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon ... /1846-1900

It seems likely that JS used different methods during different phases. The "interpreters" in the beginning and the seer stone later on. I have heard that the interpreters were confiscated after the incident with the 116 pages and not returned but I do not have a good source for this.
The article you referenced seems to continue this conflation of the term "U&T" with the brown seer stone and a whole host of other things (like the Liahona and the scriptures).
On the one hand I applaud the creative license and making the U&T into more of a metaphor for anything spiritual that helps to provide direction in one’s life. Although not mentioned in the article a patriarchal blessing would certainly seem to qualify as a U&T under this criteria.
OTOH, if we use the term U&T to apply to a whole host of different things then it becomes confusing to know what is actually signified by each usage.
nibbler wrote:Cites David Whitmer's All Believers. I haven't read his source but what's interesting is that he clarifies; early sections of the D&C were received through the U&T but later sections weren't.
I seem to remember that there was some contention in the early days of the church when JS stopped using the stone. For a time some believed that only the revelations delivered through the seer stone were genuine. This gave Hyrum Page credence when he started to produce revelations through a stone.
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 7317
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: Questions vs. Doubts or Questions vs. Questions

Post by DarkJedi » 18 Mar 2015, 10:21

As I recall, and I'm sure some of it comes from RSR, they used the terms "urim and thummim" and "seer stone" interchangeably (I think more often referring to the seer stone as urim and thummim.)
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

Post Reply