
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Linha 96: | Linha 96: | ||
{{:Pergunta: O que os associados de David Whitmer dizer sobre o seu personagem?}} | {{:Pergunta: O que os associados de David Whitmer dizer sobre o seu personagem?}} | ||
{{:Pergunta: É alguém confiável porque eles praticavam "caça ao tesouro" e acreditava no uso de pedras de vidente para encontrar objetos perdidos?}} | {{:Pergunta: É alguém confiável porque eles praticavam "caça ao tesouro" e acreditava no uso de pedras de vidente para encontrar objetos perdidos?}} | ||
==Resposta ao alegação: "Martin Harris foi tudo menos uma testemunha cética"== | |||
{{ArtigoBreveCurto | |||
|título=Carta a um Director SEI | |||
|alegação=Martin Harris foi tudo menos uma testemunha cética. | |||
}} | |||
{{desinformação|Martin Harris foi absolutamente cético. Ele necessária confirmação, que ele recebeu de Charles Anthon. | |||
}} | |||
{{:Pergunta: Martin Harris era uma testemunha ingênua que simplesmente acreditar em qualquer coisa que foi dito?}} | |||
{{:Fonte:Kenneth W. Godfrey:Um Novo Profeta e um Novo Escritura:Ensign:janeiro 1988:Uma vez que Martin encontrou uma rocha que assemelha-se de perto a seerstone}} | |||
{{:Pergunta: Será que Charles Anthon validar os personagens que Martin Harris trouxe-lhe que tinha sido copiados das placas do Livro de Mórmon?}} | |||
Sacerdócio - preocupações e perguntas Restauração | A FairMormon Análise de: Carta a um Director SEI Uma obra de autor: Jeremy Runnells
|
Templos & Maçonaria - preocupações e perguntas |
Avaliação das Alegações |
Carta a um Diretor SEI |
![]() |
Joseph Smith, o seu pai, e seu irmão (Hyrum) tinha um negócio de família de caça ao tesouro entre 1820-1827.
|
The primary evidence–especially tax records, which provide a relatively unbiased look at the Smiths' work ethic—cannot support the argument that Joseph and his family were not intensely engaged in the duties related to farming.
LDS scholar Daniel C. Peterson notes,
[I]n order to pay for their farm, the Smiths were obliged to hire themselves out as day laborers. Throughout the surrounding area, they dug and rocked up wells and cisterns, mowed, harvested, made cider and barrels and chairs and brooms and baskets, taught school, dug for salt, worked as carpenters and domestics, built stone walls and fireplaces, flailed grain, cut and sold cordwood, carted, washed clothes, sold garden produce, painted chairs and oil-cloth coverings, butchered, dug coal, and hauled stone. And, along the way, they produced between one thousand and seven thousand pounds of maple sugar annually. "Laziness" and "indolence" are difficult to detect in the Smith family.[1]
The data shows that the Smith farm increased in value, and was worth more than 90% of the farms owned by the four families—the Staffords, Stoddards, Chases, and Caprons—who would later speak disparagingly of the Smiths' work ethic.[2] How did they manage this without doing farm work? These are physical improvements. They were too poor to pay someone else to do it. So, are we to believe that Joseph's family let Joseph just sit around doing his "magic business" while the rest of them worked their fingers to the bone?
The Smith farm had a perimeter of a one and 2/3 miles. To fence that distance with a standard stone and stinger fence required moving tons of stone from fields to farm perimeter, then cutting and placing about 4,000 ten-foot rails. This does not include the labor and materials involved in fencing the barnyard, garden, pastures, and orchard, which, at a conservative estimate, required an additional 2,000 to 3,000 cut wooden rails (McNall 59, 84, 87, 91, 110-11, and 144). Clearly, this work alone—all of it separate from the actual labor of farming—represents a prodigious amount of concerted planning and labor....
In comparison to others in the township and neighborhood, the Smiths' efforts and accomplishments were superior to most. In the township, only 40 percent of the farms were worth more per acre and just 25 percent were larger. In the "neighborhood," only 29 percent of the farms were worth more and only 26 percent were larger (Assessment Rolls 1-34).[3]
What did Joseph's associates have to say about Joseph's work? Former neighbor Orlando Saunders recalled,
They were the best family in the neighborhood in case of sickness; one was at my house nearly all the time when my father died....[The Smiths] were very good people. Young Joe (as we called him then), has worked for me, and he was a good worker; they all were. . . . He was always a gentleman when about my place."[4]
John Stafford, eldest son of William Stafford said that the Smiths were "poor managers," but allowed as how Joseph "would do a fair day's work if hired out to a man...."[5]
According to Truman G. Madsen,
Mrs. Palmer, a non-Mormon who lived near the Smith farm in Palmyra, said of Joseph that "her father loved young Joseph Smith and often hired him to work with his boys. She was about six years old, she said, when he first came to their home. . . .She remembered, she said, the excitement stirred up among some of the people over the boy's first vision, and of hearing her father contend that it was only the sweet dream of a pure-minded boy.”[6]
According to a contemporary, Martha Cox,
She stated that one of their church leaders came to her father to remonstrate against his allowing such close friendship between his family and the "Smith boy," as he called him. Her father, she said, defended his own position by saying that the boy was the best help he had ever found.[7]
Joseph's brother William noted that derogatory comments about Joseph's character came only after he reported his visions,
We never heard of such a thing until after Joseph told his vision, and not then, by our friends. Whenever the neighbors wanted a good day's work done they knew where they could get a good hand and they were not particular to take any of the other boys before Joseph either… Joseph did his share of the work with the rest of the boys. We never knew we were bad folks until Joseph told his vision.[8]
Joseph Knight said that Joseph Smith, Jr. was “the best hand [my father] ever hired”[9]
Martin Harris described what a good hand Joseph was: "He lived close by my farm, and often worked for me hoeing corn for fifty cents a day, which was the biggest wages given in those times." [10] "He also said that he had hoed corn with Joseph often, and that the latter was a good hand to work."[11]
Furthermore, the Smiths produced maple sugar, a difficult and labor-intensive occupation:
Sources document over two dozen kinds of labor the Smiths performed for hire, including digging and rocking up wells, mowing, coopering, constructing cisterns, hunting and trapping, teaching school, providing domestic service, and making split-wood chairs, brooms and baskets. The Smiths also harvested, did modest carpentry work, dug for salt, constructed stone walls and fireplaces, flailed grain, cut and sold cordwood, carted, made cider, and "witched" for water. They sold garden produce, made bee-gums, washed clothes, painted oil-cloth coverings, butchered, dug coal, painted chairs, hauled stone, and made maple syrup and sugar (Research File).
Joseph Jr.'s account suggests honest industry in the face of difficult conditions: "Being in indigent circumstances," he says, "[we] were obliged to labour hard for the support of [our] Large family and . . . it required the exertions of all [family members] that were able to render any assistances" (Jessee 4). The Smith men had a reputation as skilled and diligent workers. William Smith asserted that "whenever the neighbors wanted a good day's work done they knew where they could get a good hand" (Peterson 11). Eight wells in three townships are attributed to the Smiths (Research File). They likely dug and rocked others, including some of the 11 wells dug on the farm of Lemuel Durfee, who lived a little east of Martin Harris. The Smiths did considerable work for this kindly old Quaker; some of their labor served as rent for their farm after it passed into his ownership in December 1825 (Ralph Cator; Lemuel Durfee Farm books).
Father Joseph, Hyrum, and Joseph Jr. were coopers. Coopering was an exacting trade, particularly if the barrel was designed to hold liquid. Dye tubs, barrels, and water and sap buckets were products of the Smiths' cooper shop. They also repaired leaky barrels for neighbors at cidering time (Research File).
Sugaring was another labor-intensive work. William recalls, "To gather the sap and make sugar and molasses from [1,200-1,500 sugar] trees was no lazy job" (Peterson 11). Lucy said they produced an average of "one thousand pounds" (50) of sugar a year. One neighbor reportedly said that the Smiths made 7,000 pounds of sugar one season and won a premium for their effort at the county fair (Brodie 10-11). Many people could make maple syrup, but it required considerable skill to make sugar and particularly good skill, dexterity, and commitment to make high quality sugar.[12]
Joseph foi contratado por pessoas como Josiah Stowell [para procurar o tesouro], que menciona Joseph em sua história.
|
Joseph Smith and some members of his family participated in "money digging" or looking for buried treasure as a youth. This was a common and accepted practice in their frontier culture, though the Smiths do not seem to have been involved to the extent claimed by some of the exaggerated attacks upon them by former neighbors.
In the young Joseph Smith's time and place, "money digging" was a popular, and sometimes respected activity. When Joseph was 16, the Palmyra Herald printed such remarks.
And, in 1825 the Wayne Sentinel in Palmyra reported that buried treasure had been found "by the help of a mineral stone, (which becomes transparent when placed in a hat and the light excluded by the face of him who looks into it)." [14]
Given the financial difficulties under which the Smith family labored, it would hardly be surprising that they might hope for such a reversal in their fortunes. Richard Bushman has compared the Smith's attitude toward treasure digging with a modern attitudes toward gambling, or buying a lottery ticket. Bushman points out that looking for treasure had little stigma attached to it among all classes in the 17th century, and continued to be respectable among the lower classes into the 18th and 19th. [15]
Despite the claims of critics, it is not clear that Joseph and his family saw their activities as "magical."
Em 1826, Joseph foi preso e levado ao tribunal em Bainbridge, Nova York, para o julgamento sobre fraude. Ele foi preso sobre a denúncia do sobrinho de Stowell, que acusou Joseph de ser uma: "Pessoa desordeira e um impostor."
|
In 1825 Josiah Stowel sought out the young Joseph Smith, who had a reputation for being able to use his seer stone to locate lost objects, to help him to locate an ancient silver mine. After a few weeks of work, Joseph persuaded Stowel to give up the effort. In 1826, some of Stowel's relatives brought Joseph to court and accused him of "glasslooking" and being a "disorderly person." Several witnesses testified at the hearing.
Joseph was ultimately released without being fined and had no punishment imposed upon him. Years later, a bill from the judge was discovered which billed for court services.
Gordon Madsen summarized:
"The evidence thus far available about the 1826 trial before Justice Neely leads to the inescapable conclusion that Joseph Smith was acquitted." [16]
A review of all the relevant documents demonstrates that:
It was likely that the court hearing was initiated not so much from a concern about Joseph being a money digger, as concern that Joseph was having an influence on Josiah Stowel. Josiah Stowel was one of the first believers in Joseph Smith. His nephew was probably very concerned about that and was anxious to disrupt their relationship if possible. He did not succeed. The court hearing failed in its purpose, and was only resurrected decades later to accuse Joseph Smith of different crimes to a different people and culture.
Understanding the context of the case removes any threat it may have posed to Joseph's prophetic integrity.
In the spring of 1825 Josiah Stowell visited with Joseph Smith "on account of having heard that he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye." [17] Josiah Stowell wanted Joseph to help him in his quest to find treasure in an ancient silver mine. Joseph was reluctant, but Stowell persuaded Joseph to come by offering high wages. According to trial documents, Stowell says Joseph, using a seer stone, "Looked through stone and described Josiah Stowell's house and out houses, while at Palmyra at Sampson Stowell's correctly, that he had told about a painted tree with a man's hand painted upon it by means of said stone." [18]
Joseph and his father traveled to southern New York in November of 1825. This was after the crops were harvested and Joseph had finished his visit to the Hill Cumorah that year. They participated with Stowell and the company of workers in digging for the mine for less than a month. Finally Joseph persuaded him to stop. "After laboring for the old gentleman about a month, without success, Joseph prevailed upon him to cease his operations." [19]
Joseph continued to work in the area for Stowell and others. He boarded at the home of Isaac Hale and met Emma Hale, who was one "treasure" he got out of the enterprise.
In March of the next year, Stowell's sons or nephew (depending on which account you follow) brought charges against Joseph and he was taken before Justice Neely. The supposed trial record came from Miss Pearsall. "The record of the examination was torn from Neely's docket book by his niece, Emily Persall, and taken to Utah when she went to serve as a missionary under Episcopalian bishop Daniel S. Tuttle." [20] This will be identified as the Pearsall account although Neely possessed it after her death. It is interesting that the first published version of this record didn't appear until after Miss Pearsall had died.
William D. Purple took notes at the trial and tells us, "In February, 1826, the sons of Mr. Stowell, ...were greatly incensed against Smith, ...saw that the youthful seer had unlimited control over the illusions of their sire... They caused the arrest of Smith as a vagrant, without visible means of livelihood." [21]
Whereas the Pearsall account says: "Warrant issued upon oath of Peter G. Bridgman, [Josiah Stowell's nephew] who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an imposter...brought before court March 20, 1826" [22]
So, we have what has been called "The 1826 Trial of Joseph Smith", even though the records show that this wasn't actually a trial. For many years LDS scholars Francis Kirkham, Hugh Nibley and others expressed serious doubts that such a trial had even taken place.
The court did not assess a fine against Joseph. There were bills made out by Judge Neely and Constable DeZeng, but these were for costs. Those bills were directed to the County for payment of witnesses, etc., not to Joseph.
Ensign (June 1994):
Highlights in the Prophet’s Life 20 Mar. 1826: Tried and acquitted on fanciful charge of being a “disorderly person,” South Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York. New York law defined a disorderly person as, among other things, a vagrant or a seeker of “lost goods.” The Prophet had been accused of both: the first charge was false and was made simply to cause trouble; Joseph’s use of a seer stone to see things that others could not see with the naked eye brought the second charge. Those who brought the charges were apparently concerned that Joseph might bilk his employer, Josiah Stowell, out of some money. Mr. Stowell’s testimony clearly said this was not so and that he trusted Joseph Smith. [23]
Hugh Nibley had serious doubts as to whether or not Joseph Smith was actually brought to trial in 1826, and he felt that the only real trial was in 1830. For the most part, Nibley felt that the "court record" didn't seem to be correct. The following quote is taken from Nibley's book "The Myth Makers:"
"if this court record is authentic it is the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith."
It was easy to cast doubt on the reality of the 1826 hearing until the bills from Judge Albert Neely and Constable Philip De Zeng were found in 1971. These documents were removed from their purported site of discovery by Dr. Wesley Walters, a well-known anti-Mormon author.
Walters wrote, "Because the two 1826 bills had not only suffered from dampness, but had severe water damage as well, Mr. Poffarl hand-carried the documents to the Yale University's Beinecke Library, which has one of the best document preservation centers in the country." [24] The problem with this action is, once you have removed a document from a historical setting and then try to restore it to the same setting, you can't prove that you have not altered the document.
The actions of Walters and Poffarl compromised the documents. By having the documents removed and only returned under threat of a lawsuit by the County, it opened the possibility that they could be forged documents. They are generally considered to be authentic.
Since Wesley Walters has found some bills related to the trial, the critics now claim that the case is proven and that Nibley has proven their case for them. Nothing is further from the truth. First of all you need to look at the whole quote. Nibley was chastising Tuttle for not actually using the trial record that he had. He was questioning why he would do that if it was so important.
"You knew its immense value as a weapon against Joseph Smith if its authenticity could be established. And the only way to establish authenticity was to get hold of the record book from which the pages had been purportedly torn. After all, you had only Miss Pearsall's word for it that the book ever existed. Why didn't you immediately send he back to find the book or make every effort to get hold of I? Why didn't you "unearth" it, as they later said you did? . . . The authenticity of the record still rests entirely on the confidential testimony of Miss Pearsall to the Bishop. And who was Miss Pearsall? A zealous old maid, apparently: "a woman helper in our mission," who lived right in the Tuttle home and would do anything to assist her superior. The picture I get is that of a gossipy old housekeeper. If this court record is authentic, it is the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith. Why, then, [speaking to Tuttle] was it not republished in your article in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge after 1891? . . . in 1906 Bishop Tuttle published his Reminiscences of a Missionary Bishop in which he blasts the Mormons as hotly as ever. . . yet in the final summary of his life's experiences he never mentions the story of the court record - his one claim to immortal fame and the gratitude of the human race if it were true!" (Nibley "The Myth Makers", 246)
The Pearsall account, which has never been produced, claims that the defendant was found guilty. The real point at issue is not whether or not there was a trial, but whether or not a record existed proving Joseph guilty of deceit. A document proving such guilt has not been found.
Critics of Joseph Smith's time ignored the 1826 court hearing:
The attraction of this event for a later generation of critics, however, lies in the fact that:
Many people of the 1800s did not see any differences between what later generations would label as "magic" and religiously-driven activities recorded in the Bible—such as Joseph's silver cup (see Gen. 44:2,5) in which 'he divineth' (which was also practiced by the surrounding pagans and referred to as hydromancy),[25] or the rod of Aaron and its divinely-driven power (Ex. 7:9-12).
The Bible records that Jacob used rods to cause Laban's cattle to produce spotted, and speckled offspring (see Gen. 30:37-39) — one can only imagine what the critics would say should Joseph Smith have attempted such a thing!
In Joseph Smith's own day other Christian leaders were involved in practices which today's critics would call 'occultic.' Quinn, for instance, observes that in "1825, a Massachusetts magazine noted with approval that a local clergyman used a forked divining rod.... Similarly, a Methodist minister wrote twenty-three years later that a fellow clergymen in New Jersey had used a divining rod up to the 1830s to locate buried treasure and the 'spirits [that] keep guard over buried coin'...." [26]
It is important to realize that every statement about "magic" or the "occult" by LDS authors is a negative one. Joseph and his contemporaries would likely have shocked and dismayed to be charged with practicing "magic." For them, such beliefs were simply how the world worked. Someone might make use of a compass without understanding the principles of magnetism. This mysterious, but apparently effective, device was useful even if its underlying mechanism was not understood. In a similar way, activities of the early 1800s or Biblical times which later generations would view skeptically were simply thought of as part of how the world worked.
But, it is a huge leap from this realization to charging that Joseph and his followers believed they were drawing power from anything but a divine or proper source.
Esta é uma das razões pelas quais mórmons do século 21, uma vez inclusive eu, ficamos tão confusos e perplexos ao ouvir coisas como Joseph Smith usando uma pedra em um chapéu ou Oliver Cowdery usando uma varinha de condão
|
|
Pergunta: Qual o método de tradução era mais "crível": pedra ou intérpretes nefitas vidente?
Se o presente de Oliver Cowdery era realmente uma varinha de condão, então isso diz-nos que as origens da Igreja são muito mais envolvidas na magia popular e superstição do que temos sido levados a acreditar em reabilitação de suas origens e história da Igreja SUD.
|
|
A revelação recebida por Joseph elogiou o dom de Oliver Cowdery de usar talentos divinos. A revelação foi publicada no Livro de Mandamentos, na sua forma original, e em seguida, posteriormente modificada em Doutrina e Convênios. We do not know why Sidney Rigdon chose to alter the wording of the revelation, but he is the one that actually changed the wording to "rod of nature."
Sabemos com base no texto da revelação que Oliver possuía o dom de trabalhar com algo alternadamente referido como um "broto", "coisa da natureza", ou "vara da natureza". Sabemos também que o Senhor aprovou o uso de Oliver deste dom. A referência foi mais tarde alterada para o "dom de Aarão", mas só podemos especular sobre a razão exata pela qual o Senhor permitiu-o. Segundo o site da História da Igreja, a "vara", referida por Sidney Rigdon quando editou a revelação era provável uma vara de condão. It is possible that "gift of Aaron" was substituted as the revelatory device because if carried fewer negative connotations than "divining rod." However, a "cover up" is not usually done by committee, and it is clear that multiple individuals assisted in editing the revelations before they were to be published in the Doctrine and Covenants. It is also difficult to claim a "cover up" since "rod of nature" was to be published in the Book of Commandments in 1833, only two years before change to "gift of Aaron" was published in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants.
Nós sabemos que o dom de Oliver tinha a ver com o recebimento de revelação, e que Oliver tentou empregá-lo durante o período em que o Livro de Mórmon estava sendo traduzido. Sabemos, também, que a experiência de Oliver na tentativa de traduzir produziu uma das lições duradouras que continua a ser ensinada na Igreja ainda hoje: o conhecimento de que é preciso estudar as coisas em sua mente, a fim de saber a verdade de algo.
Se nós presumimos, para fins de argumentação, que a revelação do Livro de Mandamentos de 1829 se referia a uma vara física, é útil considerar apenas o que foi dito a Oliver:
Seguiu com o tema de aprender verdades antigas através de tradução: "Lembra-te, este é teu dom." (D&C 8:5). E poderia ser exercido através da crença "receberás conhecimento concernente a gravações de velhos registros" (D&C 8:1) Então, uma segunda promessa foi feita:
Assim, a alteração que descreve a "vara" como "o dom de Aarão" esclarece a intenção do Senhor e explica como Oliver e Joseph entendiam o assunto. A vara de Aarão era um instrumento de poder, porém apenas quando o "Senhor" a revelou e o instruiu a usar. Tal perspectiva não é em nada semelhante com as conecções de "ocultismo" o qual críticos tentam estabelecer:
Como Dallin H. Oaks declarou:
Fonte:Oaks:Eventos recentes envolvendo História da Igreja e documentos falsos:Ensign:outubro 1987:ferramentas como o Urim e Tumim, a Liahona, seerstones, e outros artigos têm sido utilizados de forma adequada {{:Fonte:Tópicos do Evangelho:A Tradução do Livro de Mórmon:a Bíblia menciona outros instrumentos físicos usados para acessar o poder de Deus: a vara de Aarão, uma serpente de bronze, óleos consagrados para unção, a Arca da Aliança e até mesmo terra do chão, misturada com saliva para curar os olhos de um homem cego}}
Dizem-nos que as testemunhas nunca desmentiram seus depoimentos, mas não chegaram a investigar o que mais eles disseram sobre suas experiências. Eles são 11 indivíduos: Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdery, Hiram Page, David Whitmer, John Whitmer, Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer, Peter Whitmer Jr., Hyrum Smith, Samuel Smith, e Joseph Smith Sênior - que todos compartilhavam uma visão de mundo comum de segunda visão, magia e tesouro de escavação - que é o que eles se juntaram em 1829.
|
|
William Lang, que foi aprendiz no escritório de advocacia de Cowdery, o conhecia há muitos anos. Lang foi um membro do tribunal de Ohio, e serviu como "advogado de acusação, juiz de paz, prefeito de Tiffin,tesoureiro do condado teve dois mandatos no Senado de Ohio. Ele foi indicado por seu partido para secretarias principais do Estado por duas vezes." [30]
Lang escreveu sobre Cowdery:
O Sr. Cowdery era um advogado capaz e um grande defensor. Seus costumes eram gentis; ele foi educado, digno, e ainda cortês ... Mesmo com toda sua disposição gentil e amigável, havia um certo ar de tristeza que parecia impregnar todo o seu ser. Sua associação com as pessoas, era marcada pela grande quantidade de informação transmitida e pela beleza de sua voz musical. Seus discursos para o tribunal do júri foram caracterizados por um alto grau de oratória, com força brilhante e forense. Ele era modesto e reservado, nunca falou mal de ninguém, nunca se queixou. [31]
Harvey Gibson, um adversário político de Oliver, e outro advogado (cuja estátua está agora na frente do Palácio da Justiça do condado de Sêneca) escreveu:
Cowdery era um advogado capaz e [um] agradável, cavalheiro irrepreensível.[32]
Até mesmo os primeiros anti-mórmons que conheciam Harris, ou conhecia pessoas familiarizadas com Harris, acreditavam que ele era "honesto" "trabalhador", "benevolente", e um "cidadão digno". [33] Um jornal local escreveu sobre a partida de Harris com o Santos:
Várias famílias, totalizando cerca de cinquenta almas, partiram desta cidade na semana passada para a "terra prometida", entre as quais estava Martin Harris, um dos crentes originais do "Livro de Mórmon". O Sr. Harris estava entre os primeiros colonizadores desta cidade, e já teve o caráter de um homem honrado e íntegro, um vizinho prestativo e benevolente. Ele tinha assegurado para si mesmo por meio de honesta industriosidade uma respeitável fortuna e deixou um grande círculo de amigos e conhecidos lamentando sua ilusão. [34]
Pomeroy Tucker, que conheceu Harris, mas não acreditava no Livro de Mórmon, observou certa vez:
Conciliar o ato de Harris em assinar seu nome a tal declaração [seu testemunho do Livro de Mórmon] tendo em vista o caráter de honestidade que sempre foi concedido a ele, nunca poderia ser facilmente explicado. [35]
Alguns argumentam que a tendência de Harris em associar-se com "grupos dissidentes" SUD indica que ele era "instável e facilmente influenciado por líderes carismáticos." [36]
Esta afirmação distorce fundamentalmente as atividades de Harris durante este período. [37] Escreveu Matthew Roper:
Martin foi excomungado em dezembro de 1837 em Kirtland, Ohio, onde permaneceu por 32 anos. Durante este tempo, Harris associou-se com Warren Parrish e outros dissidentes de Kirtland que organizaram uma igreja. Em 30 de março de 1839, George A. Smith escreveu uma carta de Kirtland descrevendo algumas das divisões no grupo de Parrish. "No último Sábado aconteceu uma divisão no grupo de Parrish sobre o Livro de Mórmon; John F. Boynton, Warren Parrish, Luke Johnson e outros disseram que era um absurdo. Martin Harris então prestou testemunho de sua verdade e disse que todos seriam condenados se rejetassem-no "Tais ações sugerem um significativo grau de independência a Harris a quem geralmente não é dado o devido crédito.[38]
Harris conseguiu frustrar muitos outros grupos religiosos por sua insistência continuou a pregar o Livro de Mórmon, em vez de suas doutrinas. Ele finalmente retornou à Igreja e morreu em plena comunhão.
As testemunhas eram homens considerados honestos, responsáveis e inteligentes. Seus contemporâneos não sabiam bem o que fazer com esses três homens que testemunharam sobre anjos e placas de ouro, mas eles não impugnaram o caráter ou a confiabilidade dos homens que prestaram esse testemunho.
Ao longo de Richmond, Missouri, os não-mórmons conheciam David Whitmer como um cidadão honesto e confiável. Quando um anti-Mórmon deu uma palestra na cidade natal de David, apontando-o como de má reputação, o jornal local (não-mórmon) respondeu com "um fervoroso editorial de primeira página antipático com o mormonismo, mas insistente sobre "os 46 anos de cidadania pessoal sem mancha ou defeito por parte de David Whitmer, em Richmond, . '"[39]
... No ano seguinte, o editor escreveu um tributo sobre o octogésimo aniversário de David Whitmer, que "sem arrependimentos no passado" ainda "reafirma que viu a glória do anjo."
Esta é a questão fundamental da vida de David Whitmer. Durante 50 anos numa sociedade não-mórmon, ele insistiu com o fervor de sua juventude que sabia que o Livro de Mórmon foi divinamente revelado. Relativamente poucas pessoas em Richmond poderia aceitar tal testemunho totalmente, mas nenhuma duvidou de sua inteligência ou honestidade completa. [40]
Another newspaper declared:
Twenty two non-Mormon citizens signed the following statement, including, Mayor, county clerk, county treasurer, postmaster, revenue collector, county sheriff, two judges, two medical doctors, four bankers, two merchants, and two lawyers:
Another said:
Upon Whitmer's death, the local newspaper wrote:
Martin Harris foi tudo menos uma testemunha cética.
|
Em sua primeira conversa com Joseph Smith, Martin informou que ele lhe disse que precisaria de provas. Ele demonstrou que não estava disposto a simplesmente aceitar a palavra de Joseph para as coisas da seguinte maneira:
Mesmo em assuntos religiosos, em seguida, Martin estava bem ciente do risco de erro e decepção.
Há duas coisas específicas que Martin fez para testar Joseph.
É de conhecimento geral que Martin Harris levou cópias dos caracteres do Livro de Mórmon para Charles Anthon e outro especialista em linguagem. Enquanto Anthon diria mais tarde (em declarações parcialmente contraditórias) que ele tinha dito a Harris que era tudo uma fraude, Harris voltou mais convencido do que nunca de que Joseph realmente podia traduzir.
Durante a tradução do Livro de Mórmon, Joseph Smith, muitas vezes usava uma pequena pedra vidente. Em uma ocasião, Martin Harris trocou a pedra para outra pedra da mesma aparência. Martin relata o que aconteceu:
Certa vez, Martin encontrou uma pedra muito semelhante à pedra vidente que Joseph às vezes usava no lugar dos intérpretes e substituiu-a sem o conhecimento do Profeta. Quando a tradução recomeçou, Joseph parou por um longo tempo e então exclamou: "Martin, qual é o problema, tudo está tão escuro quanto o Egito." Martin, em seguida, confessou que desejava "calar as bocas dos tolos" que lhe diziam que o profeta memorizava frases e simplesmente as repetia. [2][46]
Novamente, Martin realizou um hábil "teste cego" da habilidade de Joseph, e Joseph passou a convencer Martin ainda mais.
A história do desejo de Martin Harris levar as 116 páginas do manuscrito do Livro de Mórmon para convencer sua família e amigos de que Joseph era um verdadeiro profeta é bem conhecida. Novamente, Martin procurou usar prova empírica (o próprio manuscrito) como prova de que Joseph podia fazer o que ele dizia.
Se Charles Anthon realmente tivesse dito a Martin que os caracteres e a tradução eram falsos, seria muito estranho Martin Harris voltar imediatamente para casa, ajudar Joseph a traduzir o Livro de Mórmon, fornecer fundos, e, eventualmente, hipotecar sua fazenda para ajudar a imprimi-lo.
Por outro lado, Anthon evidentemente não tinha nenhuma vontade de ter o seu nome associado ao "mormonismo", e por isso ele tinha motivos evidentes para alterar a história após o fato.[47]
O relato de Martin Harris da visita a Charles Anthon foi incluído em Joseph Smith - História em 1838:
64 “Fui à cidade de Nova York e apresentei os caracteres que tinham sido traduzidos, assim como sua tradução, ao professor Charles Anthon, famoso por seus conhecimentos literários. O professor Anthon declarou que a tradução estava correta, muito mais que qualquer tradução do egípcio que já vira. Mostrei-lhe então os que ainda não haviam sido traduzidos e ele disse-me serem egípcios, caldeus, assírios e arábicos; e acrescentou que eram caracteres autênticos. Deu-me uma declaração, atestando ao povo de Palmyra que eram autênticos e que a tradução, como fora feita, também estava correta. Peguei a declaração e coloquei-a no bolso; estava saindo da casa quando o Sr. Anthon me chamou e perguntou-me como soubera o jovem que havia placas de ouro no lugar onde ele as encontrara. Respondi-lhe que um anjo de Deus lho revelara.
65 Disse-me então: ‘Deixe-me ver essa declaração’. Tirei-a do bolso e entreguei-a a ele, que a pegou e rasgou em pedacinhos, dizendo que já não existiam coisas como ministério de anjos e que, se eu lhe desse as placas, ele as traduziria. Informei-o de que parte das placas estava selada e que me era proibido levá-las. Ele respondeu: ‘Não posso ler um livro selado’. Saí de lá e procurei o Dr. Mitchell, que confirmou tudo o que o Sr. Anthon dissera a respeito dos caracteres e da tradução. ”(JOSEPH SMITH—HISTÓRIA 1:64–65).
Anthon negou que houvesse validado cada um dos caracteres ou a tradução de Joseph, embora seus dois relatos escritos contradigam um ao outro em pontos-chave [48]. Por exemplo:
A pista do que Anthon disse pode ser encontrada na reação de Martin Harris. Martin se comprometeu a financiar a tradução de O Livro de Mórmon.
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now