Seerstone in a hat translation?! Is Emma Smith's "Last Testimony" Credible?

One of the main sources for the "stone in the hat" translation narrative about the Book of Mormon comes from "The Last Testimony of Sister Emma", but is this source credible? Who really wrote it? Should it be used for the films, artwork, and historical sites relating to the translation process?
I interview Jim (James) Lucas about what we know about this interview from the historical sources. Jim's new book "By Means of the Urim & Thummim: Restoring Translation to the Restoration" can be found on Amazon or here. www.digitalegend.com/products...

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

So, I didn't really make this video to have the polygamy debate. But since it's happening now I'm going to comment here briefly and give you the position I have and the position I'm going to take on my channel. If that's not something you are cool with, I'll understand. There's sure a lot of channels to watch out there. I believe the evidence that Joseph practiced polygamy to be overwhelming. I believe Brigham Young and John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff to be prophets. The statements from Joseph and Hyrum made during an extremely heated time when mobocrats were threatening the lives of the saints have to be put in that context. Did Joseph mislead people about polygamy? Yes, probably. It looks like his sermons and words are carefully dancing a definition difference between "spiritual wifery" (where you pretend God is allowing you to be married for an hour or so, so you can have sex) and adultery (where you have sex with someone who is not your wife) and plural marriage which is neither of those two things. He was technically not lying, but definitely misleading. Is it okay to lie sometimes? Yes. When people's lives are at stake. If you're hiding jews in your home and the Nazi's ask you if you're hiding jews you lie. God approved of the midwives in Exodus lying to Pharoah to protect the lives of the newborn babies in Israel from being killed. Joseph repeatedly spoke of those who would seek his life if he told them everything he knew. Plural marriage was one of those things, and was one of the main charges made by the Nauvoo Expositor that directly led to his death. Persecution from the US Government over plural marriage almost destroyed the church. So was Joseph misleading to save lives. Absolutely. Did he have a reason to do that over the seerstone or Book of Mormon translation. No. There's no significant difference in the eyes of most between the Urim and Thummim and a seerstone in a hat. I encourage you to watch the attached video link, and reconsider your attacks on Joseph's best friends (Brigham, Wilford, John Taylor, etc). kzbin.info/www/bejne/j2fJZaeVZrV6gpo

[@jakeave]

The embracing of the stone in the hat translation has confused me because there's not a lot of awesome primary sources on it.

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

Totally

[@StandforTruth712]

Actually if you read Emma's letter to her friend Emma Pilgrim, she doesn't mention herself as scribe at all for the lost 116 pages; she mentions Martin Harris as scribe and Urim &Thummin and the translation instrument. She mentions Joseph used a dark stone but can’t recall which details are true and which are false because she couldn't find her "Times and Seasons" articles or her books. She makes no mention of sitting hour after hour writing as Joseph dictated from the Stone in The Hat. Seems her mind had failed her or she wasn't a witness to Joseph using supposed stone in hat.

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

Correct. The Emma Pilgrim letter contradicts what is stated in the Last Testimony, which is what we mention in the video.

[@nathanmerritt3468]

Thank you for this interview!!!

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

Thank you for your support!

[@MRDMRD0099]

Why does the church (now finally) admit and write and produce a video showing the seer stone being used? And why hide that for so long? I’m a member and never heard of the seer stone being used ever in church growing up. We actually have a picture of JS on our ward bulletin looking at the plates directly and writing down translation. Why is that?

[@jimashman6251]

As you can see, there is no clear consensus regarding the translation method. Joseph himself only described the translation as "by the gift and power of God." In my mind, the product (BoM) is more important than the method, so I'm content with knowing that the Book of Mormon is an ancient record brought forth by a prophet.

[@brentknudson311]

The church rightfully rejected the stone in the hat theory for pretty much all of its history because it lacked solid, credible evidence. But modern LDS scholars. desperate to be accepted by mainstream, non-lds, academia, have decided to reject what Joseph Smith and every subsequent prophet said about the subject. These scholars are trusted and relied upon by the church, but in my opinion are doing the world a disservice by pushing a narrative that is simply false. The artwork that you are referring to represents what Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey said about the translation process. It is what they always claimed, what they always taught, and what they officially published. The stone in the hat theory is based on cherry picked and taken out of context quotes from mostly people who weren't actually involved in the translation. And the reason why mainstream historians take this view is because they believe that Joseph Smith is a liar and a con man, so they default to not trusting his words. They don't believe in any of his supernatural claims, so they privilege statements by people like David Whitmer, because it's easier for them to explain away the Book of Mormon with the idea that Joseph made the whole thing up and pretended to receive words on a stone.

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

@darinmyers3483 The stone in the hat theory originated with anti-mormons, and was rejected by previous historians and church leaders as false. The current crop of historians believe "all sources" including anti-mormon sources, should be considered as valid. The current church leaders are taking this view from the current historians. Some historians don't believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet, some do, but they all seem to believe in trying to use all sources, no matter how bad they are. So now we have a mixed up understanding that comes from trying to connect dots that never connected.

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

Actually, Joseph was clear that "the gift and power of God" meant "The urim and Thummim included with the plates". Many people use this phrase as justification for saying "we don't know" instead of recognizing that Joseph described the method (never said seerstone in a hat) and God described the way translation happened in the Doctrine and Covenants. I explain this in the Part 1 video.

[@Cryptosifu]

The church knew the truth but pushed the false narrative, like the painting you described, which is in every church. Imagine if they had a painting with Smith looking into a hat, a visitor, would just walk out. The church has lied on some many things.

[@heberfrank8664]

Excellent. I wish Neville would seriously consider the Andes model.

[@tuvoca825]

60%... how messed up is that?

[@LatterdaySaintIdeas]

Yes. It’s sad. Maybe some of them will find these videos.

[@UVJ_Scott]

Other than the Spirit I rely on the Book of Mormon for my testimony. I could care less about any history or so called evidence pro or con.

[@TheJanesaw]

I’m very happy for you and wish more people were like you that have a divine witness of the Book of Mormon. It really is the words written in them that are true and will bring us closer to God than any other book. As long as you and people rely on the spirit and retain that remembrance they will be solid. Having said that, many people claim 60% (per Jim) started their faith crisis or doubts with the discovery of the SITH statements. Satan sow seeds of doubt very slowly and subtly. Is it a distraction? yup! Others struggle to put things down without an explanation. This is ours.

[@UVJ_Scott]

@@Sirach144 Study the Book of Mormon. No man can be a false prophet and produce the Book of Mormon.

[@UVJ_Scott]

@@Sirach144 I’ve read every criticism of Joseph Smith and none of them disqualify him as a Prophet of God. Joseph was better than most men but if your testimony is based on the idea that only perfect men can be Prophets you need to find a religion other than Christianity. Don Bradley was out of the Church for 8 years because he believed Joseph was a flatterer and opportunist. Don was hired by Brian Hales to research Joseph’s polygamy. What he found restored his testimony of Joseph. Three of my GGGrandfathers lived a stone’s throw from Joseph, they saw him at his best and at his worst (including polygamy) and none of them lost their testimony of him as a Prophet of God. If you have a need to leave the Church there’s nothing to keep you. You don’t need an excuse.

[@JohnWilliams-dy5dz]

@@UVJ_ScottActually a person does need an excuse to leave the church. Otherwise the minds cognitive dissonance won’t let them. That’s why so many people who leave the church can’t leave the church alone. They need to continually find things wrong with the church and point out its weaknesses to help them justify leaving. It’s different if they have a legitimate faith crisis or don’t have a testimony of its truthfulness. But if the real reason they’re leaving is because it’s too hard or because they don’t want to live the standards then they definitely need some things like church history discrepancies to justify leaving the church.