Teaching Church History- Joseph Smith Using Hat to Translate

[Dlight]

I have a question for the parents on this forum. I teach the 10-11 year olds, and this year as most of you know we are doing church history. I feel dumb even having to ask this, but I am debating whether is a good idea to teach the translation account that at times Joseph may have put his seer stones into a hat in order to better see the spiritual light.

My belief is that this should be taught. When I was older and in college, I had never heard of it. When someone told me about it I was incredulous and when I discovered it was true I felt I had been lied to. In my view now this is actually no big thing, but I feel we do an injustice to our youth when we misrepresent or even withhold knowledge. By withholding this piece of information, I fear that it will be used against them at a later date. For me it along with other things I was not taught but are true worked to make me suspicious of more things and led down a darker path.

On the contrary I don't want any upset parents.

My plan was to either show them a picture of this being one of the methods, and then to talk about the Urim and Thummim in a historical context along with its use in the Old Testament to show that this was scripturally sound. I was also considering using a phone with a fully dimmed screen with a message, and ask them if they can see it better when reading it out of a bag.

Maybe I'm making too much of this. Open to any thoughts.

[Silver]

I have a question for the parents on this forum. I teach the 10-11 year olds, and this year as most of you know we are doing church history. I feel dumb even having to ask this, but I am debating whether is a good idea to teach the translation account that at times Joseph may have put his seer stones into a hat in order to better see the spiritual light.

My belief is that this should be taught. When I was older and in college, I had never heard of it. When someone told me about it I was incredulous and when I discovered it was true I felt I had been lied to. In my view now this is actually no big thing, but I feel we do an injustice to our youth when we misrepresent or even withhold knowledge. By withholding this piece of information, I fear that it will be used against them at a later date. For me it along with other things I was not taught but are true worked to make me suspicious of more things and led down a darker path.

On the contrary I don't want any upset parents.

My plan was to either show them a picture of this being one of the methods, and then to talk about the Urim and Thummim in a historical context along with its use in the Old Testament to show that this was scripturally sound. I was also considering using a phone with a fully dimmed screen with a message, and ask them if they can see it better when reading it out of a bag.

Maybe I'm making too much of this. Open to any thoughts.

Dlight, great question and an important issue to be sure. I look forward to seeing various ideas. I have a couple of thoughts right now.
1. Is there a church history "expert" in your ward who you can ask to come in and give a good perspective on the use of the seer stone in a hat?
2. Be prepared for one or more of your students to go home and tell their parents what they learned. It's possible that the parents are completely unaware of this matter and may say some rather disrespectful things in front of their child.

[Dlight]

I know that this is listed on LDS.org so It isn't like its being hidden from us. My biggest worry is parents that didn't know this...

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-morm ... n?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The scribes who assisted with the translation unquestionably believed that Joseph translated by divine power. Joseph’s wife Emma explained that she “frequently wrote day after day” at a small table in their house in Harmony, Pennsylvania. She described Joseph “sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.”28 According to Emma, the plates “often lay on the table without any attempt at concealment, wrapped in a small linen table cloth.”

[Joel]

Just show them a Brother Jake video, they are usually pretty comprehensive

[Dlight]

Another article that is maybe more appropriate is Elder Russell M Nelson's talk where he addresses it directly.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1993/07/a-tr ... t?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known. Yet we do have a few precious insights. David Whitmer wrote:

“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. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)

[Dlight]

Just show them a Brother Jake video, they are usually pretty comprehensive

Yeah sure lol. I couldn't watch that whole video, but the Urim and Thummim was different from his seer stone, and is scripturally accurate. It is talked about throughout the old testament and was used anciently by priests and leaders to reveal divine truth. As you can see from the image below the breast plate and stones are still used symbolically in the Jewish tradition to this day.



Lucy Mack Smith’s physical description:

“On the morning of September 22, after Joseph had returned from the hill, he placed the article [the Nephite interpreters] of which he spoke into my hands, and, upon examination, I found that it consisted of two smooth three-cornered diamonds set in glass, and the glasses were set in silver bows, which were connected with each other in much the same way as old fashioned spectacles. . . . He [Joseph Smith] handed me the breastplate spoken of in his history. It was wrapped in a thin muslin handkerchief, so thin that I could feel its proportions without any difficulty. It was concave on one side and convex on the other, and extended from the neck downwards, as far as the center of the stomach of a man of extraordinary size. It had four straps of the same material, for the purpose of fastening it to the breast.” (History of Joseph Smith by His Mother Lucy Mack Smith)

[FTC]

Back in the day, mostly prior to the 2000's, if you would have even hinted that Jospeh looked at a rock in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon, you'd get called into the bishop's office with threats of disfellowship, maybe even excommunication, for perpetuating anti-mormon lies.
Then the information age came bulldozing in.
Be prepared for parents that were born in the 70's, 80's, and 90's to accuse you of teaching their kids anti-mormon lies in primary as their cognitive dissonance goes bonkers.

[Spider]

I think it is a non issue if you are quoting directly from the Ensign or something from LDS.org. If parents question what you teach, give them the source.

[inho]

I'm not a parent myself, but I would encourage you to teach that. For a kid, it is as normal to just hear about the Urim and Thummim than a stone in a hat. I understand that your concern is what the parents will say about that. It might not be pleasant to get complaints from them, but as long as you are just teaching the truth you are not doing anything wrong.

[Obrien]

My best advice - teach the truth to the best of your ability. This will likely be the first of several / many problematic items you will be faced with teaching to the 10 year olds. Church history is particularly fraught with these kinds of items. Good luck.

I taught 10 year olds for a dozen years in the last 2 decades - best age group to teach in the entire church, imo.

[shadow]

I'd suggest you stick with the lesson manual. It's not your job to teach above and beyond the material you're given, that's the role of the parents. As a parent myself, I prefer teachers to stick with the manual because I know what my kids are being taught. It's my job to fill in the rest.

[Todd]

I'd suggest you stick with the lesson manual. It's not your job to teach above and beyond the material you're given, that's the role of the parents. As a parent myself, I prefer teachers to stick with the manual because I know what my kids are being taught. It's my job to fill in the rest.

Good advice. But it's also why people are leaving the church. Because they feel they've been manipulated and lied to.

Millenials, like any other generation, have a low tolerance for not being trusted with information.

My question is, why is Joseph using a seer stone to translate the plates any more sensational than an angel appearing over his bed? Or an angel giving him gold plates? A talking snake? Or how about The Israelites using a box kill their enemies ? Or Jesus Christ using mud to heal eyesight ?.

But yeah, just stick to the manual. I'm sure the parents will fill in the blanks before the kids have it explained to them by watching South Park.

[h_p]

I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the Saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them, after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions: they cannot stand the fire at all. How many will be able to abide a celestial law, and go through and receive their exaltation, I am unable to say, as many are called, but few are chosen.

Some things never change, I guess.

[passionflower]

I have a question for the parents on this forum. I teach the 10-11 year olds, and this year as most of you know we are doing church history. I feel dumb even having to ask this, but I am debating whether is a good idea to teach the translation account that at times Joseph may have put his seer stones into a hat in order to better see the spiritual light.

My belief is that this should be taught. When I was older and in college, I had never heard of it. When someone told me about it I was incredulous and when I discovered it was true I felt I had been lied to. In my view now this is actually no big thing, but I feel we do an injustice to our youth when we misrepresent or even withhold knowledge. By withholding this piece of information, I fear that it will be used against them at a later date. For me it along with other things I was not taught but are true worked to make me suspicious of more things and led down a darker path.

On the contrary I don't want any upset parents.

My plan was to either show them a picture of this being one of the methods, and then to talk about the Urim and Thummim in a historical context along with its use in the Old Testament to show that this was scripturally sound. I was also considering using a phone with a fully dimmed screen with a message, and ask them if they can see it better when reading it out of a bag.

Maybe I'm making too much of this. Open to any thoughts.

Although the object lesson you are making out of JS using his hat to translate is actually really good and interesting, and is supportive of the truthfulness of the restoration, I will chime in with Shadow that you do have to take care here.

My husband is in the SS presidency, and my daughter is a primary president, so I know for a fact the policy of the church states it is the job of the parents and not the job of the church to teach the gospel to the youth ( and you have some pretty young kids there ). In other words, you as a SS teacher are in a supporting position to the parents of the kids in your class, and not the other way around. In line with this, the D&C, which we are studying this year, places the responsibility for bringing up children in light and truth strictly on the heads of the parents, and NOT the church.

I am with you on thinking the whole hat thing is just a minor detail and is actually no big deal as you say. But the way the church sees it, if a child in your class has a major problem about this or anything in church history, he is first to go to his parents about it, and if they don't have the answer he needs or they don't care, then he can go to the bishop, who will be glad to talk with him at length, hopefully along his parents. Also, as has been said, there is enough information about most of this stuff on LDS.org. now. So even though I sympathize with how you don't want to see kids shocked later by withheld information, it isn't being withheld now, so why worry about it?

Still, the object lesson you had in mind was kind of cool, and I really appreciate your intentions. You sound like a very good, caring, conscientious teacher, and I would hate to see even one parent calling you on the phone or complaining to the bishop about you!

[Dlight]

Thank you all for your thoughts. Im leaning towards brushing over it instead of making a huge deal about it. I'm going to show several pictures depicting the way it was translated.

The lesson manual calls for actually bringing a sheet and hanging it between the kids and another kid basically to reenact one of the methods.

Considering more than one method was used, I plan to simply talk about all the methods and show art depicting each method, and if the kids raise any concerns I'll address them then.

I realize it is technically the job of the parents to teach, but that didn't really happen these days. I can tell you that in my experience, all it took was some anti-mormon telling me a little information, or finding something online that I was never taught, and I was immediately began giving that person our source a lot more credibility than they deserved.

This is how anti Mormons work, first they take a small truth, something we were never taught. They tell us about it and we don't believe it then we find out it was the truth. Then we feel like information was withheld, that raises more suspicion and we naturally begin to look for more that was withheld. That's when we find many of the vicious lies and slander and our minds are already prepped to believe it.

[kittycat51]

Maybe you could teach from the manual but hand out the link from LDS.org and tell the kids to go home and encourage their parents to explore the other knowledge concerning methods of translation (hat etc) in a family night. Wasn't this talked about in an Ensign recently concerning the seer stone, Urim and Thummim and the hat? (can't remember). I marveled recently when the Church released photos of the seer stone, how many in the Church almost scoffed because they never knew about this before, almost questioning it. Maybe that is why it wasn't released, because most just can't handle to truth and tend to mock at the simpleness of technique.

"Line upon line, precept upon precept. Here a little and there a little..."

[brianj]

I was shocked when the church released those pictures because I didn't expect them to possess the stones Smith used and because the stones didn't look like what I expected, something translucent like quartz or a gemstone.

But I really appreciate the release of the pictures. Once I got past the stone not looking as I expected I really started to admire it.

[thisisspartaaa]

Why is this such a big deal? Perhaps if it is a sunny day, take your kids outside and have them try to read your smartphone with the sun glare.

After all, a smartphone is just an item that with a click of a button, magic letters and numbers appear.

Why is the concept of a rock any different? God created the iRock well before smartphones.

[Cookies]

So not a big deal!
I remember being very excited to learn about Joseph's seer stone after I learned that, if I was righteous enough, I might find my own one day!

In 1841, Joseph showed his other, whitish stone to the Council of the Twelve in Nauvoo and told them, Brigham Young reported, “that every man who lived on the earth was entitled to a seer stone and should have one, but they are kept from them in consequence of their wickedness.”

Alva Hale….said Joseph Smith Jr. told him that the “gift of seeing with a stone” was “a gift from God” but that “peeping” was all d__d nonsense.” (Bushman, p. 48-52)

[buffalo_girl]

I think it is a non issue if you are quoting directly from the Ensign or something from LDS.org. If parents question what you teach, give them the source.

I've had two experiences teaching Youth directly quoting scripture and had parents 'report' me to the SS Presidency without giving me a call or visiting with me at church about their concerns. If parents simply believe what the children understand from the lesson, they may get a distorted view of the teacher's message.

I thought the new Teaching Method encourages guiding discussion by The Spirit Maybe, parents will need to visit the classes in order to get a better understanding of what & how their children are being taught.

[brianj]

I think it is a non issue if you are quoting directly from the Ensign or something from LDS.org. If parents question what you teach, give them the source.

I've had two experiences teaching Youth directly quoting scripture and had parents 'report' me to the SS Presidency without giving me a call or visiting with me at church about their concerns. If parents simply believe what the children understand from the lesson, they may get a distorted view of the teacher's message.

I thought the new Teaching Method encourages guiding discussion by The Spirit Maybe, parents will need to visit the classes in order to get a better understanding of what & how their children are being taught.

When I was a Sunday School teacher to teenagers, I HATED it when parents sat in on a lesson. It always felt like their presence was a polite way of saying "I don't trust you." But I had a sneaky response: I wouldn't teach the lesson that day. I would ask the parent questions which caused them to teach the lesson, occasionally asking the kids a question or asking someone to read a scripture. And the funny part is that, after getting the visiting parent to teach the lesson, they would thank me for doing such a great job of teaching!

[brianj]

So not a big deal!
I remember being very excited to learn about Joseph's seer stone after I learned that, if I was righteous enough, I might find my own one day!

In 1841, Joseph showed his other, whitish stone to the Council of the Twelve in Nauvoo and told them, Brigham Young reported, “that every man who lived on the earth was entitled to a seer stone and should have one, but they are kept from them in consequence of their wickedness.”

Alva Hale….said Joseph Smith Jr. told him that the “gift of seeing with a stone” was “a gift from God” but that “peeping” was all d__d nonsense.” (Bushman, p. 48-52)

I don't think any of us will ever "find" our own stone. I believe that if the time comes that we are worthy to receive our stone, we will know where it is and recognize it when we reach that location. It will be a spiritual version of going to the grocery store and picking up a can of kidney beans. You know which aisle to go to and where the product is on that aisle, so you just go there and grab the first can your eyes find. If we prove worthy, it will be easier to locate your stone than it is to locate a loaf of white bread in a new grocery store.

I don't believe I am anywhere near worthy of being given my stone, but it is a goal to become worthy and receive my stone.

[sandman45]

I have a question for the parents on this forum. I teach the 10-11 year olds, and this year as most of you know we are doing church history. I feel dumb even having to ask this, but I am debating whether is a good idea to teach the translation account that at times Joseph may have put his seer stones into a hat in order to better see the spiritual light.

My belief is that this should be taught. When I was older and in college, I had never heard of it. When someone told me about it I was incredulous and when I discovered it was true I felt I had been lied to. In my view now this is actually no big thing, but I feel we do an injustice to our youth when we misrepresent or even withhold knowledge. By withholding this piece of information, I fear that it will be used against them at a later date. For me it along with other things I was not taught but are true worked to make me suspicious of more things and led down a darker path.

On the contrary I don't want any upset parents.

My plan was to either show them a picture of this being one of the methods, and then to talk about the Urim and Thummim in a historical context along with its use in the Old Testament to show that this was scripturally sound. I was also considering using a phone with a fully dimmed screen with a message, and ask them if they can see it better when reading it out of a bag.

Maybe I'm making too much of this. Open to any thoughts.

TEACH THE TRUTH!!! we should not be ashamed of the truth we should seek it out and embrace it wherever we can find it and share with others!

[Joel]

this was told to CES but 10 year olds can handle the truth too so might as well give them a heads up now while they are young

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-morm ... g=eng&_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TrueIntent]

this was told to CES but 10 year olds can handle the truth too so might as well give them a heads up now while they are young

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-morm ... g=eng&_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For me that speech was such a cop out. Claiming that the essay were released to provide information is clearly false....the essays were released as damage control. With all the scriptorians and historians up at church headquarters, and we as a church have only just released 11 essays Since al gore invented the internet to explain our messy history....all this time, and we only have 11 essays on the internet. Use your brains people...they didn't want you to know because it would affect your testimony because it conflicts with what you were taught. Also, telling CE's instructors that they should be careful about "over-claiming" to "know" things about our history blows my mind.....aren't we taught to get up on fast Sunday and "over claim" that we know things are true when we don't.....that is what jacks people up....we all claimed to know stuff that we really didn't know...and what we did know, we hid. What's wrong with this picture?