Where are Joseph Smith's miracles

[rainman10]

If I remember correctly, Moses, Jesus, and the Apostles, all performed miracles to prove who they claimed to be. They all showed signs so that people could see that they really were who they said the were. I can understand why this was done, because any other person(s) could come along and claim to be the messiah or an apostle and not really be one, as many have done today. So my question is what are the miracles that Joseph Smith performed in order to prove he was sent by God to “restore” His Church?

 

[dianaiad]

If I remember correctly, Moses, Jesus, and the Apostles, all performed miracles to prove who they claimed to be. They all showed signs so that people could see that they really were who they said the were. I can understand why this was done, because any other person(s) could come along and claim to be the messiah or an apostle and not really be one, as many have done today. So my question is what are the miracles that Joseph Smith performed in order to prove he was sent by God to “reform” His Church?

Matthew 16:4

That said, I would call the production of the Book of Mormon a pretty good miracle.

Here’s the problem with what you are asking: we don’t get all excited about miracles (and I think we need a definition of ‘miracle,’ here…) and specific people; perhaps it’s a subtle difference in thinking or something, but when one of our leaders is involved in one, we don’t think it elevates his (or her) stature in any way; it is a function of the priesthood, and of faith. I know of several stories–but they are not emphasized the way others might. Shoot, I have a few stories that I could tell about my own father in regard to miracles.

Your question made me think a bit; it struck me rather hard, AMOF. I guess it really is a paradigm shift in thinking. It’s not that we don’t think miracles happen–quite the opposite. It’s that we believe anybody can pull them off with the power of the priesthood and with faith, so that they are…not ‘common,’ exactly, but rather–not something to brag all that much about. For one thing, it’s God performing the miracle, not whoever is asking for it. We tend, I suppose, to pay more attention to that part of it, and to not think that such things make a Saint (in the Catholic sense) of the human involved.

 

[LongJourney]

There were no miracles. It now seems that someone, perhaps Sidney Rigdon, used the events in this occult-involved book ia311324.us.archive.org/1/items/germanromancetra02carl/germanromancetra02carl.pdf to formulate the methodology for the “translation” and other events surrounding the writing of the BoM. The English translation of The Golden Pot, by ETA Hoffmann, was first available in 1827.

Mark Hoffman discovered the book, and used it to formulate his infamous “Salamander Letter,” which was very convincing to the highest leaders. For some strange reason.

 

[dianaiad]

There were no miracles. It now seems that someone, perhaps Sidney Rigdon, used the events in this occult-involved book ia311324.us.archive.org/1/items/germanromancetra02carl/germanromancetra02carl.pdf to formulate the methodology for the “translation” and other events surrounding the writing of the BoM. The English translation of The Golden Pot, by ETA Hoffmann, was first available in 1827.

Mark Hoffman discovered the book, and used it to formulate his infamous “Salamander Letter,” which was very convincing to the highest leaders. For some strange reason.

LJ, just because you don’t believe there were, that doesn’t mean that there weren’t. After all, those modern folk who believe that the miracle of the loaves and fishes had a very human cause and wasn’t really a miracle don’t prove, by their disbelief, that it wasn’t one.

As to your constant harping on advertising your book, c’mon. Isn’t that against the rules? Something about a personal agenda?

 

[LongJourney]

As to your constant harping on advertising your book, c’mon. Isn’t that against the rules?

That post has nothing to do with my book, which is free. However, thank you for mentioning it. I have only discovered the English translation of The Golden Pot very recently. And I can verify that.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Matthew 16:4

That said, I would call the production of the Book of Mormon a pretty good miracle.

 

[Tmaque]

In my extended LDS family there are many stories of miracles performed by Joseph Smith. But that does not make Mormonism true or mean that JS restored the gospel. Anyone can pray to God and get a miracle…it’s up to God. My Mother performed miracles a few times when I was growing up simply by virtue of her incredible faith. Nowhere does the Catholic Church teach that miracles prove someone is a prophet of God. The devil can perform miracles, can he not?

 

[dianaiad]

In my extended LDS family there are many stories of miracles performed by Joseph Smith. But that does not make Mormonism true or mean that JS restored the gospel. Anyone can pray to God and get a miracle…it’s up to God. My Mother performed miracles a few times when I was growing up simply by virtue of her incredible faith. Nowhere does the Catholic Church teach that miracles prove someone is a prophet of God. The devil can perform miracles, can he not?

Well, you got to the point a little on the backwards side, but you got to the point. Thanks! You are absolutely right; it’s faith that produces miracles; faith, and God’s participation. Miracles do not a Saint make.

…and you are correct, those miracles performed by Joseph Smith (that is a term that has always bothered me, by the way…‘performed by’ as if the person requesting the miracle was actually responsible for it) do not prove that the CoJCoLDS is ‘true,’ or that he was a prophet. That might be one of the reasons you don’t see the missionaries talking about them a whole bunch.

This topic DOES have me thinking about the subject. Y’know, I had almost the same reaction to talking about (read, ‘bragging’) about miracles ‘performed by’ Joseph Smith (or anybody else, for that matter) as I do to being asked to talk about Temple ceremonies outside Temple walls. It just seemed, for a moment, wrong.

Don’t have a clue why. Maybe it’s the ‘looking for a sign’ thing. I dunno.

…and by the way, I believe completely that your Mom produced miracles. Those come with great faith.

 

[SirThomasMore]

you are forgetting his greatest miracle…it was a miracle he kept escaping the law for the crimes he committed

 

[PaulDupre]

It’s a miracle that Emma didn’t kill him.

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

In my extended LDS family there are many stories of miracles performed by Joseph Smith. But that does not make Mormonism true or mean that JS restored the gospel. Anyone can pray to God and get a miracle…it’s up to God. My Mother performed miracles a few times when I was growing up simply by virtue of her incredible faith. Nowhere does the Catholic Church teach that miracles prove someone is a prophet of God. The devil can perform miracles, can he not?

Not only the devil but all angels or demons can produce what may be referred to as “miracles”.

There is one story I just heard of where a Pastor who knew Mandarin was attending charismatic prayer service and while people were speaking tounges he picked out through the croud a man, not praising God, but cursing God in Mandarin. The Pastor stopped him and informed the man what he was saying; the man said he had no idea.

Hence we are told “to test all spirits”. Not every “spirit” is a spirit of God.

 

[adrift]

devil can perform miracles, can he not?

From the Catholic Encyclopedia

Thus St. Thomas teaches: “Those effects are rightly to be termed miracles which are wrought by Divine power apart from the order usually observed in nature”

It would seem that miracle are accomplished by God that would seem to eliminate the devil. When I read this I wondered if you referring to some incident. I couldn’t think of anything that the devil has done that would be a miracle. Read the article and it doesn’t seem possible.

It would also contradict Jesus. When John asked if He was the one to come or should they look for another, Jesus pointed to the miracles He performed.

 

[LongJourney]

Tmaque:

You really ought to read the “Golden Pot” It implies a coherent explanation for the “miracles” surrounding the coming forth of the BoM. Those stories were taken from that book. Nothing of the sort really happened. It was all a fraud.

 

[benidict]

If I remember correctly, Moses, Jesus, and the Apostles, all performed miracles to prove who they claimed to be. They all showed signs so that people could see that they really were who they said the were. I can understand why this was done, because any other person(s) could come along and claim to be the messiah or an apostle and not really be one, as many have done today. So my question is what are the miracles that Joseph Smith performed in order to prove he was sent by God to “restore” His Church?

i dont think he did any, but i would have to say the staying power and growth of the Mormon Faith. that is miraculous. even with all the evidence to the contrary, the Mormons not only retain their faith, but their church continues to grow. if im not mistaken, it is one of the fastest growing religions in America. i reserve the right to be wrong on this. and with all due respect to my Mormon friends here, who i love in truth. i still would not have believed Joseph Smith had he performed 100s of miracles. i have to look at other criteria. having said that, i have had miracles happen in my own life, on a personal scale. i dont really talk about those much. they led me to the Catholic Church, and are very personal. my priest found one of them to be kind of amusing, seeing how it dealt with my pit bull. but it goes to show. the Blessed Mother interceeds for our pets too! and pit bulls are living proof that God loves us… Peace

 

[benidict]

It’s a miracle that Emma didn’t kill him.

your right. or his own followers, when some of his scams in ohio went bust.

 

[rainman10]

Matthew 16:4

That said, I would call the production of the Book of Mormon a pretty good miracle.

Here’s the problem with what you are asking: we don’t get all excited about miracles (and I think we need a definition of ‘miracle,’ here…) and specific people; perhaps it’s a subtle difference in thinking or something, but when one of our leaders is involved in one, we don’t think it elevates his (or her) stature in any way; it is a function of the priesthood, and of faith. I know of several stories–but they are not emphasized the way others might. Shoot, I have a few stories that I could tell about my own father in regard to miracles.

Your question made me think a bit; it struck me rather hard, AMOF. I guess it really is a paradigm shift in thinking. It’s not that we don’t think miracles happen–quite the opposite. It’s that we believe anybody can pull them off with the power of the priesthood and with faith, so that they are…not ‘common,’ exactly, but rather–not something to brag all that much about. For one thing, it’s God performing the miracle, not whoever is asking for it. We tend, I suppose, to pay more attention to that part of it, and to not think that such things make a Saint (in the Catholic sense) of the human involved.

When read in context, I understand that Jesus was admonishing the Pharisees and Saducees because they could not accept the miracles He had already performed and were testing Him by asking Him to perform additional miracles in front of them.

 1 The Pharisees and Sadducees came and, to test him, asked him to show them a sign from heaven.

2
2 He said to them in reply, “(In the evening you say, ‘Tomorrow will be fair, for the sky is red’;
3
and, in the morning, ‘Today will be stormy, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to judge the appearance of the sky, but you cannot judge the signs of the times.)
4
An evil and unfaithful generation seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah.” 3 Then he left them and went away.

So I guess I have misunderstood all along that the miracles that Jesus and the apostles performed were not so people could see who they really were and accept their teachings? I thought that the miracles were undeniable proof of who they were and what they were teaching was true. Then why did they bother to perform them?

If I were to consider going into Mormonism or any other denomination, I would want undeniable proof that I was following a true prophet. I have yet to see that from any of the current “prophets or apostles”, so I would never consider leaving Gods only true church.

 

[dianaiad]

When read in context, I understand that Jesus was admonishing the Pharisees and Saducees because they could not accept the miracles He had already performed and were testing Him by asking Him to perform additional miracles in front of them.

 1 The Pharisees and Sadducees came and, to test him, asked him to show them a sign from heaven.

2
2 He said to them in reply, “(In the evening you say, ‘Tomorrow will be fair, for the sky is red’;
3
and, in the morning, ‘Today will be stormy, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to judge the appearance of the sky, but you cannot judge the signs of the times.)
4
An evil and unfaithful generation seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah.” 3 Then he left them and went away.

So I guess I have misunderstood all along that the miracles that Jesus and the apostles performed were not so people could see who they really were and accept their teachings? I thought that the miracles were undeniable proof of who they were and what they were teaching was true. Then why did they bother to perform them?

If I were to consider going into Mormonism or any other denomination, I would want undeniable proof that I was following a true prophet. I have yet to see that from any of the current “prophets or apostles”, so I would never consider leaving Gods only true church.

Neither Jesus nor the early apostles performed miracles to show off, or prove anything. Jesus did things that needed to be done, in the fashion only He, the Savior, could manage it. The idea is, He performed miracles because He is the Savior. He wasn’t the Savior because He could perform miracles. As the scriptures note, ‘miracles’ or unexplained events, can be caused by devils.

That’s what Jesus was talking about when the Pharisees demanded that He perform for them like some trained dog. He is Who He is…and that remains true whether He chooses to perform miracles upon command or not.

As to Joseph Smith, I would say, that if he is the prophet we claim him to be, then the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price are miracle enough for anybody. That people were healed through the power of the priesthood he held is also true…but Joseph Smith is not the Savior; he didn’t perform any miracles; miracles may have been performed THROUGH him, but that’s quite a different matter.

 

[dianaiad]

(Neither Jesus nor the early apostles performed miracles to show off, or prove anything. Jesus did things that needed to be done, in the fashion only He, the Savior, could manage it. The idea is, He performed miracles because He is the Savior. He wasn’t the Savior because He could perform miracles. As the scriptures note, ‘miracles’ or unexplained events, can be caused by devils.

That’s what Jesus was talking about when the Pharisees demanded that He perform for them like some trained dog. He is Who He is…and that remains true whether He chooses to perform miracles upon command or not.

As to Joseph Smith, I would say, that if he is the prophet we claim him to be, then the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price are miracle enough for anybody. That people were healed through the power of the priesthood he held is also true…but Joseph Smith is not the Savior; he didn’t perform any miracles; miracles may have been performed THROUGH him, but that’s quite a different matter.

(replying to myself, here, in expansion of the point) As I said, it’s a very different mind set, I think. The reason we don’t emphasize what some would term as ‘miracles’ in Joseph’s life is because we, well…expect them in our own. We don’t expect our prophets to be able to do any more in that line than any man who has the priesthood, or any woman who has the faith. What makes them prophets is something entirely apart from feats of supernatural healing or whatever it is some would call ‘miracle’ (and we don’t really go in for miracles that don’t serve a practical purpose, y’know…rather like Jesus Himself did not…weeping statues and stigmata, for instance, just don’t make a whole lot of sense to us…).

What makes a prophet a prophet is that God speaks to him with things He wants everybody to know about. Think of all the prophets and apostles mentioned in the bible…and think about how many of them had miracles associated with them. You are going to find that fewer do than you expect.

 

[rainman10]

(replying to myself, here, in expansion of the point) As I said, it’s a very different mind set, I think. The reason we don’t emphasize what some would term as ‘miracles’ in Joseph’s life is because we, well…expect them in our own. We don’t expect our prophets to be able to do any more in that line than any man who has the priesthood, or any woman who has the faith. What makes them prophets is something entirely apart from feats of supernatural healing or whatever it is some would call ‘miracle’ (and we don’t really go in for miracles that don’t serve a practical purpose, y’know…rather like Jesus Himself did not…weeping statues and stigmata, for instance, just don’t make a whole lot of sense to us…).

What makes a prophet a prophet is that God speaks to him with things He wants everybody to know about. Think of all the prophets and apostles mentioned in the bible…and think about how many of them had miracles associated with them. You are going to find that fewer do than you expect.

Then how do you know, without a doubt, that it wasn’t Luther or Calvin or Zwingli or any other individual instead of Joseph Smith whom God sent to restore the church?

 

[dianaiad]

Then how do you know, without a doubt, that it wasn’t Luther or Calvin or Zwingli or any other individual instead of Joseph Smith whom God sent to restore the church?

I believe that God DID have a hand in Luther, Calvin, et al in preparing the way, actually. As for the reason I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet and these other men were not (completely aside from the fact that Calvin, Luther, et al didn’t claim that for themselves) is because I got a personal witness from the Holy Ghost that he was.

…and that, by the way, is the only way any of us ‘know’ the truth of religious things.