Mostrar código-fonte de Pergunta: O que as outras testemunhas dizem a respeito de "espiritual" versus visão "natural" das placas?

{{fonte
|título=Pergunta: O que as outras testemunhas dizem a respeito de "espiritual" versus visão "natural" das placas?
|categoria=
}}
<onlyinclude>
==Pergunta: O que as outras testemunhas dizem a respeito de "espiritual" versus visão "natural" das placas?==
===David Whitmer clarified the idea of "spiritual" versus "natural" viewing of the plates===

David Whitmer ajuda a esclarecer o "espiritual" versus visão "natural" das placas. Respondendo às perguntas de Anthony Metcalf (o mesmo Metcalf que entrevistou Harris) Whitmer escreveu:
<blockquote>
Em relação ao meu testemunho para a visitação do anjo, que declarou-nos três testemunhas de que o Livro de Mórmon é verdadeiro, eu tenho que dizer isto: É claro que estávamos no espírito quando tivemos a visão, pois nenhum homem pode contemplar o rosto de um anjo, exceto em uma visão espiritual, mas estávamos no corpo também, e tudo era tão natural para nós, como é qualquer momento. Martin Harris, como você diz, chamou de 'estar em visão. "Lemos nas 
Escrituras, que Cornelius viu, em uma visão, um anjo de Deus. Daniel viu um anjo em uma visão; também em outros lugares ele afirma que viu um anjo no espírito. Uma luz brilhante nos envolvia onde estávamos, que encheu ao meio-dia, e não em uma visão, ou no espírito, que vimos e ouvimos, assim como se afirma no meu testemunho do Livro de Mórmon. Estou agora passado dos 82 anos de idade, e eu tenho um irmão, JJ Snyder, para fazer a minha escrita para mim, 
pelo meu ditado. [Assinado] David Whitmer. <ref>Anthony Metcalf, ''Ten Years Before the Mast'' (Malad, Idaho: A. Metcalf, 1888), 74.</ref>
</blockquote> 

E para deixar absolutamente nenhuma dúvida sobre a natureza da manifestação Whitmer explicou: "Eu não estava sob qualquer alucinação.... '''Vi com estes olhos'''." <ref>Palmyra Reflector, 19 March 1831; cited in ''The Saints' Herald,'' 28 January 1936.</ref> 
{{translate}}
The young James Henry Moyle would write of a visit he had with Whitmer:

<blockquote>
I inquired of those whom I met: What kind of man is David Whitmer? From all I received the same response, that he was a good citizen, an honest man, and that he was highly respected in the community....

I wanted to know from him...what he knew about the Book of Mormon, and what about the testimony he had published to the world concerning it. He told me in all the solemnity of his advanced years, that the testimony he had given to the world, and which was published in the Book of Mormon, was true, every word of it, and that he had never deviated or departed from any particular from that testimony, and that nothing int he world could separate him from the sacred message that was delivered to him. I still wondered if it was no possible that he could have been deceived. I wondered if there was not something in that psychological operation which some offer as the cause of these miraculous declarations and by which he could have been deceived...so I induced him to relate to me, under such cross-examination as I was able to interpose [Moyle had just graduated from law school], every detail of what took place. He described minutely the spot in the woods, the large log that separated him from the angel, and that he saw the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated, that he handled them [this may be in error, given that the contemporaneous record says otherwise], and that he did hear the voice of God declare that the plates were correctly translated. I asked him if there was any possibility for him to have been deceived, and that it was all a mistake, but he said, "No."<ref>James Henry Moyle, Address, 22 March 1908, in {{EMD|vol=5|pages=142-143}}</ref></blockquote>

He also wrote later:

<blockquote>
He said that they (Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris) were out in the primitive woods in Western New York; that there was nothing between them and the Angel except a log that had fallen in the forest; that it was broad daylight with nothing to prevent either hearing or seeing all that took place...he did see and hear the Angel and heard the declaration that the plates had been correctly translated; that there was absolutely nothing to prevent his having a full, clear view of it all. I remember very distinctly asking him if there was anything unnatural or unusual about the surroundings or the atmosphere. He answered that question. I do not remember exactly the words he used, but he indicated that there was something of a haze or peculiarity about the atmosphere that surrounded them but nothing that would prevent his having a clear vision and knowledge of all that took place. He declared to me that the testimony which he published to the world was true and that he had never denied any part of it.<ref>James Henry Moyle, statement, 13 September 1938; in {{EMG|vol=5|pages=146-147}}</ref>
</blockquote>

We note here that the experience is very literal and real--but there is also a difference in atmosphere or "haze" that renders it different from day-to-day life. This dovetails well with the Three Witnesses' insistence that there was a spiritual component to their experience, though it was also literal and "real."

</onlyinclude>
{{notas}}
[[Category:Carta a um Diretor SEI]]

[[en:Question: What did the other witnesses say regarding "spiritual" versus "natural" viewing of the plates?]]
[[es:Pregunta: ¿Qué han dicho los otros testigos con respecto a "espiritual" frente a la visión "natural" de las planchas?]]