A Question about the Urim and Thummim

[_Tobin]

Thanks.

Do you know of any accounts of him using the Urim & Thummin after that time which make it clear that it is the same item he found in the stone box with the gold plates?

I don't think the Lord would have returned the U&T to Joseph Smith if he didn't intend for him to use it. And I think you are mixing up things a bit, thanks in part to Joseph Smith himself. As I remember reading, Joseph Smith had difficulty wearing the U&T (apparently because it was designed for a large person's head) and would often take the stones out of their bows and put them in a hat to be able to better translate (although that is a very poor word for it since Joseph Smith couldn't read the plates at all and wouldn't look at them very often - reveal would be better word). Anyway, he would often refer to the U&T stones by themselves as seerstones and I think that is where the confusion lies.

[_Fence Sitter]

I don't think the Lord would have returned the U&T to Joseph Smith if he didn't intend for him to use it. And I think you are mixing up things a bit, thanks in part to Joseph Smith himself. As I remember reading, Joseph Smith had difficulty wearing the U&T (apparently because it was designed for a large person's head) and would often take the stones out of their bows and put them in a hat to be able to better translate (although that is a very poor word for it since Joseph Smith couldn't read the plates at all and wouldn't look at them very often - reveal would be better word). Anyway, he would often refer to the U&T stones by themselves as seerstones and I think that is where the confusion lies.

I know the point of why the Lord would have returned it is relevant to a believer, but only to a believer. I can only go on contemporary accounts, not speculation about what God intended or not. I find it hard to believe that the U&T would have been too large for J.S. given his size vis a vis the American Indians of 1500 years ago. (Perhaps he was just unlucky enough to get Zelph's U&T. ) I have found some accounts mentioning he took the stones out of the U&T and placed them in the hat because he needed a dark place in which to read them but they were part of the 116 pages translation process. I also think the U&T (the one he found with the gold plates) is a combination of the stones, spectacles and breastplate. Perhaps the HC reference is also confusing the whole U&T with just the seer stones?
At any rate I am still trying to find references that clearly show he was using the U&T (stones, spectacles and breastplate) after the lost 116 pages. If you find some more let me know.

[_Tobin]

I don't think the Lord would have returned the U&T to Joseph Smith if he didn't intend for him to use it. And I think you are mixing up things a bit, thanks in part to Joseph Smith himself. As I remember reading, Joseph Smith had difficulty wearing the U&T (apparently because it was designed for a large person's head) and would often take the stones out of their bows and put them in a hat to be able to better translate (although that is a very poor word for it since Joseph Smith couldn't read the plates at all and wouldn't look at them very often - reveal would be better word). Anyway, he would often refer to the U&T stones by themselves as seerstones and I think that is where the confusion lies.

I know the point of why the Lord would have returned it is relevant to a believer, but only to a believer. I can only go on contemporary accounts, not speculation about what God intended or not. I find it hard to believe that the U&T would have been too large for J.S. given his size vis a vis the American Indians of 1500 years ago. (Perhaps he was just unlucky enough to get Zelph's U&T. ) I have found some accounts mentioning he took the stones out of the U&T and placed them in the hat because he needed a dark place in which to read them but they were part of the 116 pages translation process. I also think the U&T (the one he found with the gold plates) is a combination of the stones, spectacles and breastplate. Perhaps the HC reference is also confusing the whole U&T with just the seer stones?
At any rate I am still trying to find references that clearly show he was using the U&T (stones, spectacles and breastplate) after the lost 116 pages. If you find some more let me know.

I'm only relating what I read. When William Smith was interview by J. W. Peterson and W. S. Pender on July 4, 1891,

[It was] too large for Joseph's eyes; they must have been used by larger men.

- The Rod of Iron 3 (February 1924): 6-7; Saints' Herald 79 (9 March 1932)

Charles Anthon seems to confirm this when recalling Martin Harris' description of the U&T

These spectacles were so large that if a person attempted to look through them, his two eyes would have to be turned towards one of the glasses merely, the spectacles in question being altogether too large for the breadth of the human face.

- Charles Anthon letter to E. D. Howe, 17 Feb. 1834, published in E.D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed

[_Drifting]

I believe at least 33 women (11 of them married) were familiar with Joseph's stones...

[_iamse7en]

From Magic World View, this seems to infer an account of using original U&T for Book of Mormon translation:

In 1829 Martin Harris described to a newspaper how Smith used the original Urim and Thummim: "By placing the spectacles in a hat and looking into it, Smith interprets the characters into the English language." Harris later said that it was necessary for Smith to put the two stones of the Urim and Thummim into his hat because the spectacles of the breastplate into which they fit were too large (Rochester Gem, 5 Sept. 1829; Stevenson 1882, 86-87; Kirkham 1951, 2:32; Anthon 1834; Howe 1834, 270-71; also Cincinnati Advertiser and Ohio Phoenix, 2 June 1830; Brattleboro' Messenger, 30 Oct., 20 Nov. 1830).

Then Lucy Mack Smith seems to have seen and felt it [them]:

Lucy Smith's initial description of the Urim and Thummim found with the Book of Mormon: "I knew not what he meant, but took the article of which he spoke into my hands, and, upon examination, 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" (L. M. Smith 1853, 101, emphasis added).