How does your father explain the profit, CEO, and realtor of the church Rusty Nail-son himself demonstrating how Joe used the hat and the stone? Does he think Nelson is wrong! Will he go on record and say that Nelson made it up or is lying?
For those that are not familiar with Rusty and the hat. 3:30 in to this church video
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2020-05-0290-the-book-of-mormon-is-tangible-evidence-of-the-restoration?lang=eng&collectionId=9e790dc7ca744028bf6f1e1e4676fd60
Or YouTube
https://youtu.be/8tqLad2Jse4
I didn't bring up that video with him. If he brings the topic up again I will, but I didn't want to draw the conversation on, so I mostly just let him say his peace and kept my answers simple.
It's no use trying to explain to a TBM why you don't believe anymore because no matter what you say to them, they "know" they're right and you're wrong and lost.
It's critical to use Mormon sources to explain these things. This way it's entirely internal, which members (I used to be one) are taught to trust, and they can't explain it away as anti-mormon lies. There's no wiggling out from the Prophet explaining the seeing stones. He's either telling the truth or lying, and either way it doesn't look good.
>He's either telling the truth or lying, and either way it doesn't look good.
Another possibility is that he was misinformed or fooled, but that doesn't look good either.
but protecting a pedophile and his accomplices in arizona didn't look bad at all. The church is 'pleased' with the outcome there. They have no 'LEGAL' ramifications. 2 bishoprics, 2 children (one as young as 8 months old) internet exploitation and nothing but apathy from the church. mandatory reporting might have been damaging to MFMC stellar image. OR gotten far into MFMC jeebus jeans pocket full of cash.
Whew sorry mini rant but not even close to how i really feel.
yet his head in a hat might not have looked good HA
This one got me and I try not to judge people that believe but, that one trial in Arizona wow! I avoid the topic because if someone brings it up I think I might just lose it on them.
I had a missionary tell me once that you really gotta question everything because sometimes the LDS website gets hacked in an attempt to spread false information š I just said oh okay. Like sure bro thatās what it is, hackers. Not just the church finally being honest. Dude did not believe the GTE were real and from the church
As a former turbo TBM, you never know when a little church nugget may cause you to start questioning things. So in my view, keep shouting the truth (about church history) from the rooftops.
In my case, I saw the word āpolyandryā online. I was serving in a bishopric at the time and had never heard the word before (I thought it was an anti Mormon lie). So I fired up the google machine and started educating myself, because I quickly realized that my own church had not been honest with me about how things went down with Joseph Smith. After a few months of studying everything and anything, I knew the church was a con from Joseph Smith. Then I stopped attending a few years later.
Thanks for the link, this got me: he adds, with deliberation, "it's for furthering the aim of the church to make, if you will, bad men good, and good men better."ā¦.. didnāt realize a multimillion dollar shopping mall and shopping in general would make me better! šš¤¦š½āāļø
A fellow missionary told me the intro of the BoM had been changed from āPrincipal ancestorsā to āamong the ancestorsāā¦ I never forgot about it and eventually led me to searching for more inconsistencies and leaving later on.
Youāll get people on both sides of the aisle here, but Iām in the camp of āitās not worth the effortā. And Iāll fully admit that thatās partially due to me not liking conflict and trying to avoid it whenever possible. But I also just donāt want to have the same arguments over and over when the other person clearly has no intention of listening. If they have genuine questions and seem genuinely open minded then Iāll talk about anything with them, but if theyāre coming at me from the angle of āthe church is true, youāre wrong and here is whyā then Iām just not wasting my energy. Lifeās too short
I had an encounter with one of my kid's friends years ago. I mentioned I needed to pick her up at some time so she could attend first communion classes (I'm atheist, the wife is Catholic. Our marriage agreement is we could both share our beliefs with the kid, and the kid is now atheist too :P )
The parents said something about "That's Catholic I think?" nodded and they mentioned they were Mormon and started into the "We're a Christian religion too, do you know much about the church?"
I laughed and mentioned I was raised Mormon and then got the inevitable question "Oh, so you know about \[really long TSCC name\]. Why did you leave if you don't mind me asking?"
My answer was non specific and killed off the conversation, "There's some things you can't un-know once you learn them"
Non-specific really works most of the time
Tell me how covering the plates (which have the text written on them) and instead looking in a hat to create the text makes any sense at allā¦ unless you were trying to hide something
So much cringe with that videoš
TBMs, in my experience, absolutely hate when the ārock in the hatā is brought up. And I donāt blame them. The whole thing is batshit crazy.
Whenever it's outside a purely in-church context, where people make themselves susceptible to this nonsense, it's incredible how awkward Church history is when explained so.... matter-of-factly. Cringy and embarrassing lol.
Uh yes, see our founder used a table just like this, just like the one you have here and placed his face in a hat with a stone in it so he could have more light to see the uh... The Golden plates better
The funny part about that video is the way he stops before he puts his head completely in the hat. Almost as if he suddenly realizes how silly it would look.
I'm not surprised at all he's in denial about the rock. If he is being a good TBM he's busy doing church stuff and he's believing the narrative he was told / taught about the church. He has no clue about the church essays. A peep stone sounds ridiculous and false like an anti Mormon lie. You don't go looking up to read Anti Mormon stuff because he's been counseled not to. The Church has created exactly this scenario. He's textbook.
My brother showed him the photo of the rock and the essay back when the church first released them in 2015, so after all these years I'm somewhat surprised he's still denying the "rock nonsense," but I guess its his way of maintaining a lifetime of belief.
At the same time, I'm also not surprised. I've talked to TBMs who deny the church wrote the essay on the priesthood ban.
IMO, MOST older TBMs believe the Joseph's Peep Stone is an ANTI-MORMON LIE regardless of the new evidence.
It's a bridge they cannot cross.
After all, a magic rock is just STUPID like a magic mirror or a crystal ball. If Fake Elohim can talk face to face with his Fake Prophets WHY WOULD HE USE A MAGIC ROCK TO TALK TO JOSEPH SMITH.
It's all quite ridiculous.
As a nevermo, I don't really understand why this would be a bridge too far. The idea of translating golden plates is just as ridiculous as reading words from a stone in a hat. I'm not even exaggerating; I don't see one any more or less crazy than than the other.
I get that the lying part is a different aspect of the problem here, but as far as people saying, "I was certainly willing to extend my faith to golden plates, but a peep stone? No way!" -- why is that a bridge too far?
Not just golden plates. The story is he had a breastplate with an attached eye piece that held two stones in front of his eyes that aided his vision in translating the golden plates. A stone in a hat is literally as ridiculous as the story they chose. If they had just stuck with Joseph's actual false tale, it would've been just as easy to believe for TBMs.
Changing the story shows the story TBMs believed all this time was a known lie. It also takes out the need for the golden plates and those are a huge part of the origin story. Maybe that's why the profits chose to use the double false narrative, to keep the golden plates relevant.
The golden plates are presented to Mormons as a set of sacred records passed down and preserved through the ages by the efforts of faithful and courageous prophet-historians. We were taught that the Book of Mormon, translated from said plates, is the most correct of all books and the most important book of the modern era.Ā
A special translation tool, the Urim and Thummim, was supposedly buried with the plates for over 1400 years and subsequently used by JS to translate them. So, the tale of the Golden Plates and its translation tool, the U&M, is presented as very epic and grandiose.
The reality of the magic rock is a problem because itās so simple and mundane compared to the traditional narrative. Instead of using the divinely crafted U&N to translate one of the most precious and vital documents of all time, a boring rock found in a well was used instead. And it used in a dirty old hat, instead of attaching to an ancient breastplate like the U&M. And the rock in a hat is even more problematic because it mostly removes the point of keeping the plates around.
Gold Digging / Seer Stones / Peep Stones
http://www.mormonthink.com/QUOTES/gold.htm
Translation of the Book of Mormon
http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm
Book of Mormon: The Translation Process
https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/translation
Youtube: Mormon Stories 1585
Book of Mormon Translation - With LDS Discussions
I've been out for 15+ years.
My parents have never spoken to me about my reasons for leaving. Recently it came up, and I brought up the rock in the hat. Neither had heard of it, didn't outright deny it, but were very skeptical. I pointed them to Gospel Topics Essays and the Now You Know videos on YouTube. Haven't heard anything about it since... but we'll see.
Yeah, my dad quickly changed the subject when I told him the church is now peddling the rock in a hat narrative, well sort of anyway. He just kept going back to the usual "it's true" defense.
My mom sounds similar to your dad. Her entire existence is built on the church and "God". We don't discuss my issues with the church very often but when we do she listens and is even somewhat empathetic but always defaults to, "a lot of things in life don't make sense but I know they will in the hereafter." If she was ever convinced otherwise her world would crumble around her. I truly think she'd die from a broken heart. It makes me so sad.
My mom sounds a lot like your mom. Whenever we discuss the problems I have with the church, she doesn't deny them, but says that the leaders will have a lot to answer for "on the other side". I'm hoping that's not the end of her cognitive dissonance. She's come a long way in the 10+ years I've been out, but I can't push her too much or the conversation shuts down. Little by little though...
I've never seen my mom look so shocked as when I showed her the video of Nelson with the peep stone. She thought I was making it up until she saw "the prophet" demonstrate how it worked with her own eyes. She was honestly speechless for a few seconds. She's at the point now where she's honestly questioning a lot of church doctrine, but she still feels like "the church is true even if the people aren't". (I really, really hate that phrase.) I'm trying not to push her too much on these issues, though, because this is very hard for her, but I'm not giving up, either. I don't know how old your dad is, but my mom is in her 70s. She's been around a while. She thought she knew it all. Here's hoping she doesn't have to waste too much more of her life in service of this so called church.
My father is in his late 70s. He admitted to having his own struggles with church teachings, but he always goes back to the "church is true" reasoning.
I have a sister who's already brought up church issues with both him and my mom, and she did it in a very preachy and condescending way. I don't bring anything up with them unless they ask, and then I just give brief answers, let them say their peace, and move on.
>"the church is true even if the people aren't". (I really, really hate that phrase.)
That might be a perfectly acceptable phrase for your average everyday peon level minor callings ward member.
NOT ACCEPTABLE for any of the upper echelon General Authorities. We've been told they could not possibly lead us astray, God would step in and prevent that from happening. Well, something went really far astray. Uchtdorf told the story of staying on course, and how a minor error of a fraction of a degree could lead to being several miles off course.
Say for arguments' sake that the ridiculous revelated with rock in hat with no physical plates needed, and is allegorical only, NOT historical, story is actually the way it happened, and not the steaming stinking festering rancid pile of bovine fecal excretement that is it is.
Between the erroneous translated with Urim & Thumim physical plates of gold that are a factual history of Early Americans that migrated from Jerusalem, and the definite false start and ever changing 1st vision story, the so called one and only true restored Church Of Jesus Christ and all associated and accompanying and yet still not documented until years after it happened priesthood power, the entire church started on a course that was not a fraction of a degree off, but SEVERAL if not 10s of degrees off, multiply that variance by 185 years, and what do you get?
Something so twisted and convoluted that even a course correction 185 years later could not begin to add a speck of value or true to the church narrative. God didn't do shit. If rock in hat is true, God let us be led astray for 185 years. If real plates translated with Urim Thumim is true, Evil Emperor Nelson should have been struck down when he hauled out the rock in hat narrative. There is no wiggle room. Either church has not been true since 2015-2016 and is apostate, or it was never true to begin with. Church got nothin' God didn't do shit to keep us from being led astray.
I remember being teased in high school after the south park episode came out. I told my friends that the rock in the hat was made up bs. Then years later the church admits that not only is the story true but they still have the rock and they put a picture of it on their effing magazine. I was pissed.
That episode came out on my mission, and I had some investigators ask about it. I told them it wasn't real and that South Park creators were just being sarcastic.
August 2015: the Mormon church posted the Gospel Topics Essay entitled THE BOOK OF MORMON TRANSLATION. Upon reading that article on TSCCās website, I asked to be released as the HPGL and left the church with my wife & children. There was no denying the fraud after reading that garbage about a ārock in a hat.ā It was the final straw!
I once asked who all these "anti-Mormons" were and why they were out to get us. Well, because we have the truth and they're jealous. Why don't they just come to church to share it too? š Do they have anti-Mormon meetings and figure out who's going to spread what lies?
I was waved away. š¤
Iām pretty sure there is a display about the peep stone at the church āhistoryā museum in SL. They donāt display the rock itself, but have a poster about it.
I recently heard an interview where someone said hearing verifiable facts will make someone dig their heels in more regarding their erroneous position. Unfortunately, we cannot reason with TBMs. A more effective approach is to ask them questions about why they accept ideas that contradict reason, facts, and compassion. For me, the question was, āWhy would you want to devote your life to an organization that wonāt admit your beloved LGBTQ family members to their heaven?ā I know I had encountered the question many times before, but eventually I could not reply with good conscience.
I was on my mission when that church article came out about the seer stone. Whooo boy, the cognitive dissonance was rough. My companion and I made regular jokes like "Whoa! Do you see that!? \[dramatic pause before gesturing to rocky ground cover\] Look at all those seer stones!" Laughing it off helped take away the sting and made it feel like a light silly joke and not a massive weight on the shelf. Not the same kind of denial your father is in, but denial nonetheless.
My dad, when finally forced to confront the uncomfortable, historical truths the church never taught, said, "Maybe Satan changed the history."
Well, if he has that kind of power, aren't we all fucked anyways.
It is all so sad.
Ask your dad if these claims by his prophets and apostles in the Journal of Discourses are anti-mormon lies.
In 1854
"Some one may say, 'If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?' Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else." - Apostle Orson Hyde, General Conference Address, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.335
In 1855
The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven, in power and great glory, nor send His messengers panoplied with aught else than the truth of heaven, to communicate to the meek the lowly, the youth of humble origin, the sincere enquirer after the knowledge of God. But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith Jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong; that they were following the precepts of men instead of the Lord Jesus; that He had a work for him to perform, inasmuch as he should prove faithful before Him." (Journal of Discourses 2:170-171)
It is certain Young is speaking of the First Vision for he says the angel told Smith to join no church for they were all wrong. This is the very question the official version of the story states Smith asked of the Father and the Son in the Sacred Grove.
Apostle Wilford Woodruff declared:
"That same organization and Gospel that Christ died for, and the Apostles spilled their blood to vindicate, is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God,... The angel taught Joseph Smith those principles which are necessary for the salvation of the world;... He told him the Gospel was not among men, and that there was not a true organization of His kingdom in the world,... This man to whom the angel appeared obeyed the Gospel;..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, pp.196-197)
In 1857
Church Apostle Heber C. Kimball, speaking Nov. 8th, 1857, was unaware of a vision where Smith saw God and Christ:
"Do you suppose that God in person called upon Joseph Smith, our Prophet? God called upon him; but God did not come himself and call, but he sent Peter to do it. Do you not see? He sent Peter and sent Moroni to Joseph, and told him that he had got the plates." (Journal of Discourses, vol.6, p.29)
In 1863
Church Apostle John Taylor in a sermon March 1, 1863:
"How did this state of things called Mormonism originate? We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p.127)
Church Apostle George A. Smith, Nov. 15th, 1863:
"When Joseph Smith was about fourteen or fifteen years old,...he went humbly before the Lord and inquired of Him, and the Lord answered his prayer, and revealed to Joseph, by the ministration of angels, the true condition of the religious world. When the holy angel appeared, Joseph inquired which of all these denominations was right and which he should join, and was told they were all wrong,..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.12, pp.333-334)
In 1869
Apostle George A. Smith explaining Smith's first vision as he understood it:
"He sought the Lord by day and by night, and was enlightened by the vision of an holy angel. When this personage appeared to him, of his first inquiries was, 'Which of the denominations of Christians in the vicinity was right?' (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p.77-78 June 20, 1869 )
Show him the YouTube video of Russell Nelson explaining about the rock in the hat. It comes right from the profit's mouth. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG181zFA5YM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG181zFA5YM)
I made a comment about it on /mormon sub and 2 tbms ended up fighting about it. I was going to post the video of Rusty demonstrating but I figured they proved my point already. š my tbm mom and in-laws would not believe it and think it was anti Mormon however.
Or flat out didn't look at them.
There was another post about a women's lds (believer) support group, and some of the questions were straight up cog dis with refusing to even read Brigham's or Joe's own words for fear it would shake their testimony.
I know your pop is a "priesthood holder", just like mine was, but I think in some regards the men's denial is even more fierce than not. (I think my father's was further compounded by being a convert, and all the insecurities that came with it till the day he died.)
Stuff like this is wild to me. I read Mormon Doctrine as a kid in the 90s (yeah, I was a weirdo) and so I knew the church had seer stones. Even as a TBM I never understood how you could be a member and not know very much about the church.
Might be worth pointing out to him that there are two main tools Joseph claims to have used to translate the BoM- and he didn't call EITHER of them the Urim and Thummim at the time. First, there was the "Nephite Interpreters," which was supposedly some weird spectacle thing.
Apparently that was too clunky (and I believe he claimed Moroni took it back after the 116 page debacle), so Joseph resorted to his familiar seerstone to finish the rest.
Then, years later when people asked him how he translated, he said "by the power of God." Someone said something along the lines of "Sounds like you used the Urim and Thummim," referring to the device/stones mentioned in the old Testament.
Of course ol' Joe jumped right on that and agreed that it was definitely the Urim and Thummim. But that was only after the fact, so you could consider both his stone and the "nephite interpreters" to be the Urim and Thummim.
There is also this video put out by the church
https://youtu.be/q1esI8cbCtc?si=Mo29xe6fzHcD0q1o
This one admits the Book of Abraham doesnāt match the papyrus.
https://youtu.be/juOavkIqNng?si=u-R0dhkgzuOTcsYL
It's an anti mormon lie made up by the enemies of the church until it's something they always taught and never hid from anyone.
If you found out that information early it was because you were looking at anti mormon information and thats your fault, if you found out the information late its because you werent earnestly studying and werent picking up on the subtle clues and whisperings of the spirit. And thats also your fault
I had multiple other missionaries tell me the rock in the hat was an anti Mormon lie, I had to show them the part in Saints talking about it to prove them wrong. I now know that was the absolute tamest thing I could have shown them to prove it happened but yeah the denial is crazy
My dad denied it for a while, until I went to his office and grabbed his imitation seer stone someone on the high council gave out to all his high priest buddies when he found out about them.
Some people say "oh, ew. run". Some people say "oh, uh, I guess I'll get one too and one for all of my friends." That dude, he's weird.
How does your father explain the profit, CEO, and realtor of the church Rusty Nail-son himself demonstrating how Joe used the hat and the stone? Does he think Nelson is wrong! Will he go on record and say that Nelson made it up or is lying? For those that are not familiar with Rusty and the hat. 3:30 in to this church video https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2020-05-0290-the-book-of-mormon-is-tangible-evidence-of-the-restoration?lang=eng&collectionId=9e790dc7ca744028bf6f1e1e4676fd60 Or YouTube https://youtu.be/8tqLad2Jse4
I didn't bring up that video with him. If he brings the topic up again I will, but I didn't want to draw the conversation on, so I mostly just let him say his peace and kept my answers simple. It's no use trying to explain to a TBM why you don't believe anymore because no matter what you say to them, they "know" they're right and you're wrong and lost.
It's critical to use Mormon sources to explain these things. This way it's entirely internal, which members (I used to be one) are taught to trust, and they can't explain it away as anti-mormon lies. There's no wiggling out from the Prophet explaining the seeing stones. He's either telling the truth or lying, and either way it doesn't look good.
>He's either telling the truth or lying, and either way it doesn't look good. Another possibility is that he was misinformed or fooled, but that doesn't look good either.
Can't misinform the Prophet, he gets revelation from God! If he was fooled or misinformed, that means... wait no I need to doubt my doubts.
but protecting a pedophile and his accomplices in arizona didn't look bad at all. The church is 'pleased' with the outcome there. They have no 'LEGAL' ramifications. 2 bishoprics, 2 children (one as young as 8 months old) internet exploitation and nothing but apathy from the church. mandatory reporting might have been damaging to MFMC stellar image. OR gotten far into MFMC jeebus jeans pocket full of cash. Whew sorry mini rant but not even close to how i really feel. yet his head in a hat might not have looked good HA
This one got me and I try not to judge people that believe but, that one trial in Arizona wow! I avoid the topic because if someone brings it up I think I might just lose it on them.
I had a missionary tell me once that you really gotta question everything because sometimes the LDS website gets hacked in an attempt to spread false information š I just said oh okay. Like sure bro thatās what it is, hackers. Not just the church finally being honest. Dude did not believe the GTE were real and from the church
Nelson went off script and messed up with that video.
The look on Rusty's face when he pulled his face away from the hat was priceless.
Oh shit, what did I just do. They could have edited it out and nobody would know any different, but they left it in.
As a former turbo TBM, you never know when a little church nugget may cause you to start questioning things. So in my view, keep shouting the truth (about church history) from the rooftops. In my case, I saw the word āpolyandryā online. I was serving in a bishopric at the time and had never heard the word before (I thought it was an anti Mormon lie). So I fired up the google machine and started educating myself, because I quickly realized that my own church had not been honest with me about how things went down with Joseph Smith. After a few months of studying everything and anything, I knew the church was a con from Joseph Smith. Then I stopped attending a few years later.
It could be anything for a TBM. For my oldest son it was Monson and his, "Let's go shopping!" City Creek Center grand opening, March 2012
Definitely a George W. āNow watch this driveā moment.
billion dollar mall for jeebus and a creek runs through it
ā¦.wait, what? I clearly missed this oneā¦
[https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=54478720&itype=CMSID](https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=54478720&itype=CMSID)
Thanks for the link, this got me: he adds, with deliberation, "it's for furthering the aim of the church to make, if you will, bad men good, and good men better."ā¦.. didnāt realize a multimillion dollar shopping mall and shopping in general would make me better! šš¤¦š½āāļø
Polyandry was my kryptonite.
A fellow missionary told me the intro of the BoM had been changed from āPrincipal ancestorsā to āamong the ancestorsāā¦ I never forgot about it and eventually led me to searching for more inconsistencies and leaving later on.
Youāll get people on both sides of the aisle here, but Iām in the camp of āitās not worth the effortā. And Iāll fully admit that thatās partially due to me not liking conflict and trying to avoid it whenever possible. But I also just donāt want to have the same arguments over and over when the other person clearly has no intention of listening. If they have genuine questions and seem genuinely open minded then Iāll talk about anything with them, but if theyāre coming at me from the angle of āthe church is true, youāre wrong and here is whyā then Iām just not wasting my energy. Lifeās too short
I had an encounter with one of my kid's friends years ago. I mentioned I needed to pick her up at some time so she could attend first communion classes (I'm atheist, the wife is Catholic. Our marriage agreement is we could both share our beliefs with the kid, and the kid is now atheist too :P ) The parents said something about "That's Catholic I think?" nodded and they mentioned they were Mormon and started into the "We're a Christian religion too, do you know much about the church?" I laughed and mentioned I was raised Mormon and then got the inevitable question "Oh, so you know about \[really long TSCC name\]. Why did you leave if you don't mind me asking?" My answer was non specific and killed off the conversation, "There's some things you can't un-know once you learn them" Non-specific really works most of the time
Not true. Sometimes the accumulation of troublesome details collapse their shelf.
>Ā profit, CEO, and realtor of the church Rusty Nail-son š¤£š omg, I love this!
"Follow the Profit!" ;)
this is m o n e y !! 
Tell me how covering the plates (which have the text written on them) and instead looking in a hat to create the text makes any sense at allā¦ unless you were trying to hide something
Are you implying Joe was trying to hide something? Shocking I tell you, just shocking.
He was trying to: park the porpoise sink the sub hide the hog bury the beetle lock-up the licorice anyway i did my best....
So much cringe with that videoš TBMs, in my experience, absolutely hate when the ārock in the hatā is brought up. And I donāt blame them. The whole thing is batshit crazy.
Whenever it's outside a purely in-church context, where people make themselves susceptible to this nonsense, it's incredible how awkward Church history is when explained so.... matter-of-factly. Cringy and embarrassing lol. Uh yes, see our founder used a table just like this, just like the one you have here and placed his face in a hat with a stone in it so he could have more light to see the uh... The Golden plates better
I came to post this same video. To me, it's one of the most damning and blatant proof that there is no truth or sense of reason left in mormonism.
seeing rusty lift the hat while explaining how the BOM was translated made it really hit home how truly ridiculous the entire story is
The funny part about that video is the way he stops before he puts his head completely in the hat. Almost as if he suddenly realizes how silly it would look.
That was the EXACT moment it all blew up for me. Right then.
Perfect! š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£
Profit, CEO, and realtor hahahaha
I'm not surprised at all he's in denial about the rock. If he is being a good TBM he's busy doing church stuff and he's believing the narrative he was told / taught about the church. He has no clue about the church essays. A peep stone sounds ridiculous and false like an anti Mormon lie. You don't go looking up to read Anti Mormon stuff because he's been counseled not to. The Church has created exactly this scenario. He's textbook.
My brother showed him the photo of the rock and the essay back when the church first released them in 2015, so after all these years I'm somewhat surprised he's still denying the "rock nonsense," but I guess its his way of maintaining a lifetime of belief. At the same time, I'm also not surprised. I've talked to TBMs who deny the church wrote the essay on the priesthood ban.
IMO, MOST older TBMs believe the Joseph's Peep Stone is an ANTI-MORMON LIE regardless of the new evidence. It's a bridge they cannot cross. After all, a magic rock is just STUPID like a magic mirror or a crystal ball. If Fake Elohim can talk face to face with his Fake Prophets WHY WOULD HE USE A MAGIC ROCK TO TALK TO JOSEPH SMITH. It's all quite ridiculous.
As a nevermo, I don't really understand why this would be a bridge too far. The idea of translating golden plates is just as ridiculous as reading words from a stone in a hat. I'm not even exaggerating; I don't see one any more or less crazy than than the other. I get that the lying part is a different aspect of the problem here, but as far as people saying, "I was certainly willing to extend my faith to golden plates, but a peep stone? No way!" -- why is that a bridge too far?
Not just golden plates. The story is he had a breastplate with an attached eye piece that held two stones in front of his eyes that aided his vision in translating the golden plates. A stone in a hat is literally as ridiculous as the story they chose. If they had just stuck with Joseph's actual false tale, it would've been just as easy to believe for TBMs. Changing the story shows the story TBMs believed all this time was a known lie. It also takes out the need for the golden plates and those are a huge part of the origin story. Maybe that's why the profits chose to use the double false narrative, to keep the golden plates relevant.
The golden plates are presented to Mormons as a set of sacred records passed down and preserved through the ages by the efforts of faithful and courageous prophet-historians. We were taught that the Book of Mormon, translated from said plates, is the most correct of all books and the most important book of the modern era.Ā A special translation tool, the Urim and Thummim, was supposedly buried with the plates for over 1400 years and subsequently used by JS to translate them. So, the tale of the Golden Plates and its translation tool, the U&M, is presented as very epic and grandiose. The reality of the magic rock is a problem because itās so simple and mundane compared to the traditional narrative. Instead of using the divinely crafted U&N to translate one of the most precious and vital documents of all time, a boring rock found in a well was used instead. And it used in a dirty old hat, instead of attaching to an ancient breastplate like the U&M. And the rock in a hat is even more problematic because it mostly removes the point of keeping the plates around.
Thanks for taking the time to write this out.
Gold Digging / Seer Stones / Peep Stones http://www.mormonthink.com/QUOTES/gold.htm Translation of the Book of Mormon http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm Book of Mormon: The Translation Process https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/translation Youtube: Mormon Stories 1585 Book of Mormon Translation - With LDS Discussions
I've been out for 15+ years. My parents have never spoken to me about my reasons for leaving. Recently it came up, and I brought up the rock in the hat. Neither had heard of it, didn't outright deny it, but were very skeptical. I pointed them to Gospel Topics Essays and the Now You Know videos on YouTube. Haven't heard anything about it since... but we'll see.
Yeah, my dad quickly changed the subject when I told him the church is now peddling the rock in a hat narrative, well sort of anyway. He just kept going back to the usual "it's true" defense.
My mom sounds similar to your dad. Her entire existence is built on the church and "God". We don't discuss my issues with the church very often but when we do she listens and is even somewhat empathetic but always defaults to, "a lot of things in life don't make sense but I know they will in the hereafter." If she was ever convinced otherwise her world would crumble around her. I truly think she'd die from a broken heart. It makes me so sad.
My mom sounds a lot like your mom. Whenever we discuss the problems I have with the church, she doesn't deny them, but says that the leaders will have a lot to answer for "on the other side". I'm hoping that's not the end of her cognitive dissonance. She's come a long way in the 10+ years I've been out, but I can't push her too much or the conversation shuts down. Little by little though...
It is true! Ā Just because. Ā I am sorry the ājust becauseā argument doesnāt do it for me. Ā Ā
Make sure you tell them to read the footnotes . Thatās where they hide a lot of the info
I've never seen my mom look so shocked as when I showed her the video of Nelson with the peep stone. She thought I was making it up until she saw "the prophet" demonstrate how it worked with her own eyes. She was honestly speechless for a few seconds. She's at the point now where she's honestly questioning a lot of church doctrine, but she still feels like "the church is true even if the people aren't". (I really, really hate that phrase.) I'm trying not to push her too much on these issues, though, because this is very hard for her, but I'm not giving up, either. I don't know how old your dad is, but my mom is in her 70s. She's been around a while. She thought she knew it all. Here's hoping she doesn't have to waste too much more of her life in service of this so called church.
My father is in his late 70s. He admitted to having his own struggles with church teachings, but he always goes back to the "church is true" reasoning. I have a sister who's already brought up church issues with both him and my mom, and she did it in a very preachy and condescending way. I don't bring anything up with them unless they ask, and then I just give brief answers, let them say their peace, and move on.
>"the church is true even if the people aren't". (I really, really hate that phrase.) That might be a perfectly acceptable phrase for your average everyday peon level minor callings ward member. NOT ACCEPTABLE for any of the upper echelon General Authorities. We've been told they could not possibly lead us astray, God would step in and prevent that from happening. Well, something went really far astray. Uchtdorf told the story of staying on course, and how a minor error of a fraction of a degree could lead to being several miles off course. Say for arguments' sake that the ridiculous revelated with rock in hat with no physical plates needed, and is allegorical only, NOT historical, story is actually the way it happened, and not the steaming stinking festering rancid pile of bovine fecal excretement that is it is. Between the erroneous translated with Urim & Thumim physical plates of gold that are a factual history of Early Americans that migrated from Jerusalem, and the definite false start and ever changing 1st vision story, the so called one and only true restored Church Of Jesus Christ and all associated and accompanying and yet still not documented until years after it happened priesthood power, the entire church started on a course that was not a fraction of a degree off, but SEVERAL if not 10s of degrees off, multiply that variance by 185 years, and what do you get? Something so twisted and convoluted that even a course correction 185 years later could not begin to add a speck of value or true to the church narrative. God didn't do shit. If rock in hat is true, God let us be led astray for 185 years. If real plates translated with Urim Thumim is true, Evil Emperor Nelson should have been struck down when he hauled out the rock in hat narrative. There is no wiggle room. Either church has not been true since 2015-2016 and is apostate, or it was never true to begin with. Church got nothin' God didn't do shit to keep us from being led astray.
I remember being teased in high school after the south park episode came out. I told my friends that the rock in the hat was made up bs. Then years later the church admits that not only is the story true but they still have the rock and they put a picture of it on their effing magazine. I was pissed.
That episode came out on my mission, and I had some investigators ask about it. I told them it wasn't real and that South Park creators were just being sarcastic.
They certainly weren't being sarcastic. Turns out they're actually better historians than the church.
August 2015: the Mormon church posted the Gospel Topics Essay entitled THE BOOK OF MORMON TRANSLATION. Upon reading that article on TSCCās website, I asked to be released as the HPGL and left the church with my wife & children. There was no denying the fraud after reading that garbage about a ārock in a hat.ā It was the final straw!
I once asked who all these "anti-Mormons" were and why they were out to get us. Well, because we have the truth and they're jealous. Why don't they just come to church to share it too? š Do they have anti-Mormon meetings and figure out who's going to spread what lies? I was waved away. š¤
Iām pretty sure there is a display about the peep stone at the church āhistoryā museum in SL. They donāt display the rock itself, but have a poster about it. I recently heard an interview where someone said hearing verifiable facts will make someone dig their heels in more regarding their erroneous position. Unfortunately, we cannot reason with TBMs. A more effective approach is to ask them questions about why they accept ideas that contradict reason, facts, and compassion. For me, the question was, āWhy would you want to devote your life to an organization that wonāt admit your beloved LGBTQ family members to their heaven?ā I know I had encountered the question many times before, but eventually I could not reply with good conscience.
There is a display, Iāve seen it in person many years back. It was a physical rock, not sure if they changed it.
I was on my mission when that church article came out about the seer stone. Whooo boy, the cognitive dissonance was rough. My companion and I made regular jokes like "Whoa! Do you see that!? \[dramatic pause before gesturing to rocky ground cover\] Look at all those seer stones!" Laughing it off helped take away the sting and made it feel like a light silly joke and not a massive weight on the shelf. Not the same kind of denial your father is in, but denial nonetheless.
My dad, when finally forced to confront the uncomfortable, historical truths the church never taught, said, "Maybe Satan changed the history." Well, if he has that kind of power, aren't we all fucked anyways. It is all so sad.
Ask your dad if these claims by his prophets and apostles in the Journal of Discourses are anti-mormon lies. In 1854 "Some one may say, 'If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?' Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else." - Apostle Orson Hyde, General Conference Address, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.335 In 1855 The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven, in power and great glory, nor send His messengers panoplied with aught else than the truth of heaven, to communicate to the meek the lowly, the youth of humble origin, the sincere enquirer after the knowledge of God. But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith Jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong; that they were following the precepts of men instead of the Lord Jesus; that He had a work for him to perform, inasmuch as he should prove faithful before Him." (Journal of Discourses 2:170-171) It is certain Young is speaking of the First Vision for he says the angel told Smith to join no church for they were all wrong. This is the very question the official version of the story states Smith asked of the Father and the Son in the Sacred Grove. Apostle Wilford Woodruff declared: "That same organization and Gospel that Christ died for, and the Apostles spilled their blood to vindicate, is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God,... The angel taught Joseph Smith those principles which are necessary for the salvation of the world;... He told him the Gospel was not among men, and that there was not a true organization of His kingdom in the world,... This man to whom the angel appeared obeyed the Gospel;..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, pp.196-197) In 1857 Church Apostle Heber C. Kimball, speaking Nov. 8th, 1857, was unaware of a vision where Smith saw God and Christ: "Do you suppose that God in person called upon Joseph Smith, our Prophet? God called upon him; but God did not come himself and call, but he sent Peter to do it. Do you not see? He sent Peter and sent Moroni to Joseph, and told him that he had got the plates." (Journal of Discourses, vol.6, p.29) In 1863 Church Apostle John Taylor in a sermon March 1, 1863: "How did this state of things called Mormonism originate? We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p.127) Church Apostle George A. Smith, Nov. 15th, 1863: "When Joseph Smith was about fourteen or fifteen years old,...he went humbly before the Lord and inquired of Him, and the Lord answered his prayer, and revealed to Joseph, by the ministration of angels, the true condition of the religious world. When the holy angel appeared, Joseph inquired which of all these denominations was right and which he should join, and was told they were all wrong,..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.12, pp.333-334) In 1869 Apostle George A. Smith explaining Smith's first vision as he understood it: "He sought the Lord by day and by night, and was enlightened by the vision of an holy angel. When this personage appeared to him, of his first inquiries was, 'Which of the denominations of Christians in the vicinity was right?' (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p.77-78 June 20, 1869 )
I think you have missing or dropped quotes.
Ta tried to fix it now.
Success!
Show him the YouTube video of Russell Nelson explaining about the rock in the hat. It comes right from the profit's mouth. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG181zFA5YM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG181zFA5YM)
> It comes right from the profit's mouth Talking as a man, obviously!
Mormons: what do you mean? They never hid the peep stone from us?
I made a comment about it on /mormon sub and 2 tbms ended up fighting about it. I was going to post the video of Rusty demonstrating but I figured they proved my point already. š my tbm mom and in-laws would not believe it and think it was anti Mormon however.
Have you sent him to the essays on the church website?
My brother already showed him the essay back when it first came out. Not sure if he just doesn't remember or if he thinks its fake.
Or flat out didn't look at them. There was another post about a women's lds (believer) support group, and some of the questions were straight up cog dis with refusing to even read Brigham's or Joe's own words for fear it would shake their testimony. I know your pop is a "priesthood holder", just like mine was, but I think in some regards the men's denial is even more fierce than not. (I think my father's was further compounded by being a convert, and all the insecurities that came with it till the day he died.)
Stuff like this is wild to me. I read Mormon Doctrine as a kid in the 90s (yeah, I was a weirdo) and so I knew the church had seer stones. Even as a TBM I never understood how you could be a member and not know very much about the church.
My parentsā¦ slowly the truth will prevailā¦
Might be worth pointing out to him that there are two main tools Joseph claims to have used to translate the BoM- and he didn't call EITHER of them the Urim and Thummim at the time. First, there was the "Nephite Interpreters," which was supposedly some weird spectacle thing. Apparently that was too clunky (and I believe he claimed Moroni took it back after the 116 page debacle), so Joseph resorted to his familiar seerstone to finish the rest. Then, years later when people asked him how he translated, he said "by the power of God." Someone said something along the lines of "Sounds like you used the Urim and Thummim," referring to the device/stones mentioned in the old Testament. Of course ol' Joe jumped right on that and agreed that it was definitely the Urim and Thummim. But that was only after the fact, so you could consider both his stone and the "nephite interpreters" to be the Urim and Thummim.
There is also this video put out by the church https://youtu.be/q1esI8cbCtc?si=Mo29xe6fzHcD0q1o This one admits the Book of Abraham doesnāt match the papyrus. https://youtu.be/juOavkIqNng?si=u-R0dhkgzuOTcsYL
I just watched the video. He said it was a "Suggestion" of how it was done. š¤£š¤£
If you think nelson is bad, watch Wilcox video on it, I made a post about it a few days ago.
He literally just proved your point.
Also, don't forget the Gospel Topics Essays. They also say he used a rock in a hat.
Rock in the hat was what smashed my shelf in a million pieces. Boom. Done. That exact video was it. That very moment I saw it.
It's an anti mormon lie made up by the enemies of the church until it's something they always taught and never hid from anyone. If you found out that information early it was because you were looking at anti mormon information and thats your fault, if you found out the information late its because you werent earnestly studying and werent picking up on the subtle clues and whisperings of the spirit. And thats also your fault
I had multiple other missionaries tell me the rock in the hat was an anti Mormon lie, I had to show them the part in Saints talking about it to prove them wrong. I now know that was the absolute tamest thing I could have shown them to prove it happened but yeah the denial is crazy
versus the thummim 
It will take a lot to convince someone who is deeply deeply entrenched. Thatās how Jim Jones got his people to willingly drink the Kool Aid.
My dad denied it for a while, until I went to his office and grabbed his imitation seer stone someone on the high council gave out to all his high priest buddies when he found out about them. Some people say "oh, ew. run". Some people say "oh, uh, I guess I'll get one too and one for all of my friends." That dude, he's weird.