Research

[Emower]

I ran across this post on reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... mormon_is/
I react to the OP calling "avid" redditing research. I dont feel like one could feel like good about research based on only what come out of reddit.

So, short of spending time in the archives at the church history library, what has everyone here done to feel good about the research they have performed? I have read books, both from the faithful and unfaithful side. I suppose this isnt a whole lot different from reddit, but if something doesnt have footnotes and the ability to follow up, I dont give it much thought.

[AllieOop]

I ran across this post on reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... mormon_is/
I react to the OP calling "avid" redditing research. I dont feel like one could feel like good about research based on only what come out of reddit.

So, short of spending time in the archives at the church history library, what has everyone here done to feel good about the research they have performed? I have read books, both from the faithful and unfaithful side. I suppose this isnt a whole lot different from reddit, but if something doesnt have footnotes and the ability to follow up, I dont give it much thought.

Great thoughts and good question!

I like to try to get as close as I can to the actual source. I love reading anything that was written contemporaneously or at least within a few years of when an event happened. Anything written in the 1800's is fascinating to me (regarding the church). I loved finding and reading William Clayton's Nauvoo diaries, for instance. I also loved reading John Corrill's writings (published in 1839) about what really took place in Missouri. They actually lived what happened.

I try to avoid or at least try not to be influenced by other's conclusions or summaries until I've done all the research I can on a topic and then I like to come to my own conclusions. There are definitely many things that occurred in church history that we simply do not know for sure how they went down, but we can get pretty close and can use some common sense and good critical thinking skills to surmise at least (most of the time).

[Red Ryder]

I just read everything AllieOop writes!

[Corsair]

"Rough Stone Rolling" is a strategically good move because Bushman is a Stake Patriarch and temple worker. The book is sold in Deseret Book so it has legitimacy when it agrees with "MormonThink" and the "CES Letter." I actually enjoyed the book quite a lot and found the writing style to be easily readable.

One unusual source of reassurance has been some unrelated reading that surprised me when it unintentionally led back into LDS history. I have been reading histories of the Roman Empire and succeeding Byzantine Empire. After reading the long historical thread from a pagan Romulus in 750 BC to Orthodox Christian Constantine XI in 1453 AD, a few unintentional conclusions jumped out at me. LDS history felt thin and insubstantial compared with the rich history of Christianity and western civilization forged in conquest, argument, and striking contrasts of brilliance, compassion, and pain. Joseph Smith's restoration faith is really weak in comparison. The "Great Apostasy" feels like this profoundly weak excuse for Mormonism to barge onto the tiny stage of 19th century frontier America.

The Hagia Sophia is greater than any LDS temple. St. Benedict had more character than any LDS prophet. Early Christian apologists have better arguments forged from Greek and Roman classics. Every generation of believers in either Christianity and Western Civilization has to reforge anew a connection to Jesus Christ and foundations of civilization. Joseph Smith has a tiny part late in history that is simply a young faith surrounded by believers with thousands of years of thought and history.

It's not that I simply think the LDS church is not "true". It's simply not very relevant and seems interested largely in organizational survival. At this point it only accidentally carries on a generically Christian tradition while regularly insulting all religious history between the death of Peter and the birth of Joseph Smith.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

When I am sharing uncomfortable facts with members I always make sure I can back up my conclusions from faithful authorship. Not because I think the research is better academically than critical authors, but because it boosts the cognitive dissonance levels because it plays upon the emotional tribal phenomenon of "where did you get that from?". The human brain will automatically reject "outsider" information because it is designed to filter information based on conditioned biases. It's more effective persuasion to use insider info.

[AllieOop]

I just read everything AllieOop writes!

Ok...this made me laugh right outloud

Good one, RR

[wtfluff]

I ran across this post on reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... mormon_is/
I react to the OP calling "avid" redditing research. I dont feel like one could feel like good about research based on only what come out of reddit.

So, short of spending time in the archives at the church history library, what has everyone here done to feel good about the research they have performed? I have read books, both from the faithful and unfaithful side. I suppose this isnt a whole lot different from reddit, but if something doesnt have footnotes and the ability to follow up, I dont give it much thought.

Mormonthink was what originally opened my eyes to the lies and half-truths that had been forced upon me from the instant I was born. Mormonthink was harsh, but it does attempt to show both sides of the issues. Mormonthink started my journey, but as far as internet message boards are concerned, NOM 1.0 was my lifesaver, and my "in-depth research". During the first few weeks of my awakening, I spent many, many hours devouring the experiences documented there. Reddit was much too harsh for me in the beginning, now I probably fit in better there.

In the depths of destroying my entire worldview, I also read books from both the faithful and unfaithful side. As far as books are concerned, I actually spent more time reading what would be considered the faithful side. In Sacred Loneliness "broke the camel's back" as far as physical book reading was concerned for me. It was the only book I started that I couldn't finish, it was just too depressing for me to get through.

Podcasts were also part of my "research" and that continues even now. I'm not so sure any of my "Podcast Research" would be considered from the faithful side, unless you consider early Mormon Storied podcasts as faith promoting. (They didn't really promote my faith, but the let me know that I wasn't crazy.)

During that time, I also begged and pleaded with the heavens for something, anything at all that would allow me to cling to my worldview.

Unfortunately, the heavens were silent, which went right along with all of the evidence I was finding that told me beyond a reasonable doubt that the church was not what it claimed to be.

Now, if there is any need to explain any of this to a believer, I don't see a need to go anywhere beyond the church's own "Essays" (including footnotes) along with the church's own correlated material which completely contradicts the "Essays".

[Ghost]

some unrelated reading that surprised me when it unintentionally led back into LDS history.

I've found that all kinds of things that have nothing to do with Mormonism or even religion offer new insights when viewed through a different metaphorical lens. Before, I evaluated new information in light of my current view of the world, which of course included many LDS truth claims. I think I subconsciously limited myself, missing some of the meaning and significance that I might have discovered otherwise.

That said, I don't see it as a problem that I approached the world in that way. I still do, just with a different take on said LDS truth claims.

But to answer the original question, there are definitely sources I trust more than others. I've long been partial to Dialogue Magazine, and I've been a subscriber for years now. And, of course, I give books by historians a lot more weight than things I read on the Internet that do not refer back to such books.

And that said, the bigger issues for me are fundamental philosophical ones. Historical concerns have acted more as a catalyst to get me to see past walls in my thinking. But I still find the history fun to study and I try to have an accurate picture of it to the extent that it's possible to do so.

[2bizE]

There is a lot of research that can be done on JS papers. It is legitimate sources. For example, the RS meeting minutes where women receiving and using the priesthood is discussed. Also, the 1832 version of 1st vision can be seen where it was cut out by Joseph fielding Smith. This corroborates the story on Dialogue about how the record was cut out and hidden in his safe for 30 years.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

I've heard the story of the page being ripped out and stored in a safe, but I've never seen any real evidence for it. What Dialogue article discusses this? Are there other places that discuss the evidence for this event?

[GoodBoy]

I have invested thousands of hours into researching the truthfulness of Mormonism. But the best way to prove something is true or right, is to compare it with other similar religions, beliefs, and traditions. You use it as a control in a comparison experiment against other religions. You use a sample size that is greater than one.

I have done this A LOT.

My conclusion is that the beliefs that the Mormons accept without evidence (or on faith) are as equally ridiculous or require just as much "faith" or "just-choose-to-believe" as the beliefs of Muslims, Hindus, New Age Spiritualism, and all other faiths. It is clear that the adherents of all these different religions are moved and inspired and that these beliefs improve their lives and help these people hold together the social fabric of their lives. I have hundreds of examples of spiritual experiences and life changing power of all of these religions. But... there are no significant differences between religious beliefs.

i.e. there isn't one truth.

I've pleaded with God to help me find the one truth or to let me know what, if anything, he really wants me to do in a way that I can really identify it as being from God, and not from myself. I'm ready and willing to do whatever is required and make any necessary sacrifice. But I don't know when God is speaking to me. I have received revelation from God that the Mormon church ISN'T true. I've received revelation and answers to my prayers that it is OK to do things that are strictly forbidden by Mormon doctrine. i.e. I can't tell the difference from these answers I got to answers to prayers I received as a missionary. I therefore conclude that it is primarily myself answering my own prayers.

Because there isn't one truth, if you want to stay in a religious tribe, and hang onto faith of some sort then you might as well stick with Mormonism.

[2bizE]

I've heard the story of the page being ripped out and stored in a safe, but I've never seen any real evidence for it. What Dialogue article discusses this? Are there other places that discuss the evidence for this event?

There is an article in Dialogue 2014 from Stan Larsen. A PowerPoint link here also provides a summary. Find the links in this blog article.



https://mormonbandwagon.com/bwv549/1832 ... -11-years/

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/site/a ... rst-vision

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Thank you!

[2bizE]

I've heard the story of the page being ripped out and stored in a safe, but I've never seen any real evidence for it. What Dialogue article discusses this? Are there other places that discuss the evidence for this event?

There is an article in Dialogue 2014 from Stan Larsen. A PowerPoint link here also provides a summary. Find the links in this blog article.



https://mormonbandwagon.com/bwv549/1832 ... -11-years/

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/site/a ... rst-vision

If you follow this JS papers link and go to the 1832 version of the 1st vision, you will find the source notes. This is the researchers describing the letter book JS wrote in. They even explain how the three pages were excised and the taped back in much later with scotch tape. Piece that together with the dialogue article and you have a very good picture of what happened.

[redjay]

I went down the rabbit hole listening to MS podcast. Mrs Redjay insisted that I read the footnotes of the research. So a few days BoA was enough to persuade me that the apologists were victims of cog dis at best and disingenuous at worst.