Joseph Smith as a Mystic

I suppose that this falls in the category of the Queen's family.

To continue following my line of thought with this post, you first have to assume that Christian Mysticism is real and not to be confused with Jewish Mysticism or mysticism in other religions such as Hindu mysticism. To follow my reasoing, you have to agree that a mystic really is somoene who encounters  the Divine in a way not fathomable to most people.

If you can follow that premise, then the next thing you need to "accept" to follow my dialectic is the Google Dictionary definition of a mystic which is: "A person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect" That is currently at  https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+a+mystic&rlz=1I7ADFA_en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7#hl=en&rlz=1I7ADFA_en&q=mystic&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=5J4AUJrLMMTi2QWzxtSbBA&ved=0CE8QkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=20426e73fad65345&biw=1280&bih=490

So, we are not talking about the occult or magic. This is a real experience of God in a way that is not readily observable by all people.

So, the next thing you need to agree (only) for now in order to follow my train of thought is that Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism (Latter Day Saints) really saw God the Father and God the Son (Jesus Christ) as well as an angel named Moroni once upon a time while praying in New York. Even if you do not agree with that Mormon belief, for my point, let us say that is true, just for now

With all of my assumptions being understood, then I believe that it is fair to say that Joseph Smith was a mystic. He said he saw God during prayer. He was absorbed into God, apprehending something not seen by others. If you understand my understanding of the word mystic, I think you will see why I think that it can be said that Joseph Smith was a mystic, at least according to those who believe that what he claimed was true.

This all seems pretty minor, but I think a great friendship that I had with someone may have been lost over this very issue. That saddens me. I think my friend, who is Mormon, sees mysticism as quackery and so becomes very angry if Smith is described as a mystic,

We had not established the meaning of the word mystic before a lunch conversation took us down this path. I thought that her definition was different from mine; so, I asked her what she meant when she used the word "mystic." Her reply, made in another very angry voice and curt tone, was "Well apparently not the same as yours!!!!!"

I could not figure out why she was so angry or why she would presume what my definition of "mystic" is since she had never asked. I explained to my friend what my definition of "mystic" is and how that made Smith a "mystic." I never said his claims were false. I only accounted his claims as true (it did not matter if I believe them or not, because that was not the point of the pleasant lunch that tuned into an angry outburst).

She calmed down a bit and I asked her what word she used to describe Joseph Smith and his vision in New York. She said, simply, "manifestation." I said okay and left it at that. To you dear reader, I want to say that that word describes the vision. That is, if one believes it to be true, a "manifestation of God." That still does not describe Joseph Smith. It seems to me that if one still wants to accept what he claims he saw, then he is a mystic. (Perhaps she should have used the word "prophet" in the way that Mormons use that term. It would have made more sense.) As I explored the Internet, I did find some definitions of "mystic," like at the Merriam Webster site, that called mysticism "magic." Maybe my friend thought that is what mysticism is. I do not know. I wish she had asked me what I was talking about before making assumptions and flying into a rage as if I had attacked the core of her being.

So, dear reader, I think I have lost a dear friend. It is hard to go back to surface pleasantries after such an event. What I would like to suggest to you all is that if somebody uses a word that does not gel with your understanding of the word that you ask the person what they mean rather than searching all over the Internet and assuming what the speaker meant by the word. What you find may not be what the speaker meant at all.