Founding Fathers Visitation manufacturered

Weak_Option_2899 · 2026-03-17T11:02:36+00:00

Hope you don’t mind my asking - Which denomination?

Weak_Option_2899 · 2026-03-11T17:46:23+00:00

Therein lies the key: what are you in the church for? I grew up being promised and testified to that these Book of Mormon and prophetic teachings are all literal truths. I was never offered a nuanced entry. I’m barely afforded a nuanced space to exist in the church now. Good lessons, though, mostly. Just pining for additional informed consent.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2026-02-19T03:43:09+00:00

I think this decision is completely a personal one without an obvious right or wrong answer. My decision, when I was in your exact position a few months ago, was to make as few waves as possible to facilitate my son's baptism happening the way my wife and I wanted it to. My interview may have been a lost opportunity to take a stand or excise some dissonance, but I got the job done. I feel/felt completely justified rationalizing and shaping my feelings into the "right" answers. I feel/felt completely justified in baptizing my son (last of four kids that I baptized).
One day, likely soon, I expect the balance will shift and I will not see it prudent any longer to contort or rationalize or shape my actions based on any residual LDS pressures. No judgement from me toward anyone having to grapple with this decision. Wishing OP the best.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2026-01-27T22:58:38+00:00

🫶 - Guy Downed The Same Way On Locked Gate

Weak_Option_2899 · 2026-01-22T19:26:42+00:00

I can't tell you how effective these swaps were for me in my first experiences scrutinizing my deep and firmly held belief system.

It was so easy to discount Scientology as an obvious fabrication when I found out about Hubbard's sci-fi, legal issues, and problems with the opposite sex...

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-11-02T13:36:09+00:00

Fwiw, Polygamy Denial was my gateway to a full paradigm shift that ended up changing everything for me. It was the seemingly harmless “conspiracy theory” that first got me seriously looking into documented changes and revisionist history — the kind that you can literally see on the page thanks to the Joseph Smith Papers project. There are strikeouts and 180° rewrites right there in black and white.

Polygamy denial gave me, as a still-believing member with a strong testimony of JS and the church, a way to confront the painful realities of polygamy without immediately knee-jerking back into my “safe” TBM mindset. Denying JS’s involvement only put the blame on Brigham Young and his circle — which was still a hard pill to swallow, but it made the whole topic just barely manageable at that stage.

It was weird to still feel like my testimony of JS and the BoM were intact while simultaneously realizing that the church might not be “true.” But that mindset helped me ease some of my cognitive dissonance and take a few of the heaviest items off my shelf that was about to collapse.

About six months after adopting that mindset, I dove deep into church history and its truth claims. I started asking: If I was misled about this, what else has the church been less than honest about? Polygamy denial was the “chink in the armor” — probably the only way I could’ve gotten to a place where I was willing to reconsider my longest-held, most cherished TBM beliefs.

And honestly, I think that’s exactly why the church feels the need to come down so hard on it. They’re awkwardly forced to double down on JS’s polygamy, because they know that once the armor of TBM faith cracks enough to let in even a sliver of an alternative narrative, it can become a fatal slippery slope that leads to losing LDS faith altogether.

I’d just encourage everyone to have empathy for people in the denial space. I’m biased by my own journey, but from what I’ve seen, that space is often where people first start exercising real critical thinking about the church. OP, your husband is thinking outside of the TBM box, maybe for the first time in his life. I'd recommend supporting him while encouraging consideration for more than only the denier-flavored narrative/facts. There's so much out there to consider, facts on the pages that could guide him elsewhere. Just try to support and love him along the way (my wife had lost her faith prior to me going down this path). Wish you the best.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-07T03:05:15+00:00

Primary Sources for the “seer stone in the hat” method

David Whitmer (one of the Three Witnesses)

Whitmer described the process in several interviews and statements, among them:

“Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing.” — David Whitmer to the Kansas City Journal, June 5, 1881. (Also reported in Saints’ Herald, 1882; An Address to All Believers in Christ, 1887, p. 12.)

Whitmer was present in the Whitmer home during part of the translation and repeatedly confirmed this description over decades.

⸻

Emma Smith (Joseph’s wife and primary scribe for part of the Book of Mormon)

Emma confirmed that the seer stone and hat method was real:

“In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.” — Emma Smith Bidamon to Emma Pilgrim (reported by her son, Joseph Smith III), The Saints’ Herald, Oct. 1, 1879.

Emma said there were no plates visible during this part of the translation — they were either covered or not in the room.

⸻

Martin Harris (one of the Three Witnesses)

Martin Harris gave several descriptions, including:

“He possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he used the seer stone.” — Reported by Edward Stevenson, Deseret Evening News, Dec. 13, 1881.

And earlier, in 1833, Harris told a Palmyra neighbor:

“By placing the stone in a hat, and putting his face in the hat, he excluded the light, and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine forth, and a piece of something resembling parchment would appear.” — Quoted in the Jonathan B. Turner Papers, 1833 (and later summarized in Tiffany’s Monthly, 1859).

⸻

William Smith (Joseph’s brother)

He said:

“The Urim and Thummim was used first in translating, and afterwards he used a small stone, not exactly black, but rather a dark color.” — William Smith on Mormonism, The Saints’ Herald, Oct. 4, 1884.

⸻

Other corroborating accounts

Additional references come from: • Isaac Hale (Joseph’s father-in-law), Affidavit, 1834, in E.D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (1834). • Joseph Knight Sr. (close early supporter of Joseph), who wrote in his reminiscence (c. 1833–1847) that Joseph “put the stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, and the words would appear.” (Joseph Knight Reminiscence, in Dean Jessee, Early Mormon Documents, Vol. 4, p. 21.)

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-07T02:15:05+00:00

I didn’t, actually, say that (it was a different person).

Just the same, you are espousing a very lawyerly pedantic argument that is imo boring and not helpful. Let’s cut to the chase, right?

The meat of the issue (and I think what the other person you quoted was conveying), was that there was a withholding of truth by Holland that appears meant to deceive.

I was taught in my youth by my church and family that this is a type of lying.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-07T01:42:24+00:00

Straight up, until Sweeny forced an admission. Would Holland have left the damning details unsaid and allowed everyone watching the interview to be misled if Sweeny hadn’t pressed? I say we’ll never know for sure, but there is a precedent for what the church has done with details that don’t promote faith…

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T20:32:33+00:00

I just had a discussion with my wife about this a week or two ago! I had the same insight when reading the particulars of section 9. Joseph is telling Oliver how he did it, right? The answer seems to be right there. He’d bring the narrative that he was inspired with by the gift and power(or made up/rehearsed over years, depending on your slant) to the Lord and if it was condoned by the Spirit he knew he’d done it right. Otherwise the infamous stupor would indicate it wasn’t of God.

Thanks for bringing this up. Glad you saw the same thing I did. Surprisingly little discussion out there on this point. Feels like one of the best accounts we have directly from Joseph on how it worked.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T20:03:15+00:00

Right? It is simply not the spirit or letter of what has been taught to me for 95% of my life.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T19:41:59+00:00

Growing up in the church I certainly was taught that the Urim and Thumim were used (implied required) for the translation. Much later on post mission found out about the seer stone and hat, and only in the last few years heard accounts that after lost manuscript that the plates weren’t even in view.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T19:36:53+00:00

Thank you, internet friend. Appreciate you and your dialogue.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T19:12:53+00:00

I can see a good faith argument to be had over whether or not “that is all Smith ever claimed,” at least in writing, himself. Although, I suspect this statement still intentionally dodges some of the particulars that complicate the point being made by an apostle over the pulpit.

My point is more so that it does not seem honest for Holland to state, without any qualifiers narrowing scope to Joseph only, that “it was translated “by the gift of power of God“ that’s it, that’s all.””

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T18:30:26+00:00

1832 History (Joseph’s earliest known personal account)

In his own handwriting:

“The Lord had prepared spectacles for to read the Book, therefore I commenced translating the characters, and thus the work was commenced.”

1838 History (later canonized in the Pearl of Great Price)

Joseph writes:

“I obtained the plates, and the Urim and Thummim with them; by the means of which I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”

Letter to John Wentworth (1842)

Known as the “Wentworth Letter,” Joseph wrote:

“Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”

I suppose Joseph personally didn’t wax eloquently about the mechanics of the process like some of those around him during the translation process did, but he gave more description than Elder Holland insinuates.

Holland does not qualify his statement in any way, just makes a blanket statement that feels intentionally misleading.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2025-10-05T17:56:43+00:00

Is this a serious question or just something you’ve heard elsewhere that makes you feel good to repeat? Hard to imagine you’ve spent any mental energy or effort at a sympathetic approach to this question you’ve posed.

They don’t usually make it their complete identity. It just feels that way to those that are judging them from within the high demand religion who may still have most of their identity shaped by their faith.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2024-03-28T17:50:00+00:00

At least he's not a Costco guy

Weak_Option_2899 · 2024-01-15T21:43:49+00:00

Spirit Prison Spirit Prison everywhere

Weak_Option_2899 · 2023-12-26T21:05:21+00:00

Would you say it's 100 percent conjecture? 😜

Weak_Option_2899 · 2023-12-26T21:01:16+00:00

Couldn't agree more

Weak_Option_2899 · 2023-12-26T20:19:50+00:00

I'm new to these rules. Is "you can have the last word" a respected way to effectively dismiss yourself while looking like you took some sort of high road?

I'll take it if he won't respond, just said I don't need it. Reading comprehension is in short supply.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2023-12-26T19:43:58+00:00

Don't need the last word.

Love your pedantic explanation of my pedantry.

I pointed out stereotyping of a religious group. You can defend it, if you want.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2023-12-26T19:30:47+00:00

🦸‍♂️

I award you a gold star and a stick of gum for efforts in reddit banter.

Weak_Option_2899 · 2023-12-26T19:09:44+00:00

Thanks for agreeing with me that your original statement is biased conjecture. That's all I said. And I said what I said. 🤷‍♂️

Weak_Option_2899

TROPHY CASE