The concept of "studying" the gospel is actually a misnomer and suffers from the following problems:

1. The studying should be limited to church approved sources.

2. It is encouraged to "experiment upon the word" or in other words to try on the belief which can tend to allay skepticism and open a person up to deception and confirmation bias.

3. The answers that one is to expect are emotion based such as the "Burning in the Bosom" (D&C 9:8) and the seed growing and swelling within (Alma 32). Emotions are often misleading and frequently the result of irrelevant influences ranging from fleeting physiological states, expectancies, and erroneous information.

A person can feel any combination of happy, content, fulfilled, and more when reading any random work of fiction. Those feelings have nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the materials in the book. It is an effect of many influences such as the potentially emotion laden content, life events, recent amounts of rest or lack thereof, and a myriad chemical influences.

4. Then there is the overt explanation that there is only one right answer. If you do not receive an answer that the Book of Mormon is true, Monson is a prophet, etc then you have been deceived and you must continue the process of seeking the emotional confirmation until you come to the predetermined conclusion that it is true.

There is nothing subtle about the deceptive and misleading process of gaining a testimony. It is laid out explicitly in the Book of Mormon, Doctrine in Covenants, the missionary discussions, numerous conference talks, and many other sources. For text book examples of how to arrive at incorrect conclusions one need look no further than the deluge of materials provided by Mormonism.

If all of this should fail then there are numerous other tactics to sway the questioner to accept the emotion-laden conclusion. Many are completely disconnected from any relevant issues. One that I have seen used on a few occasions is bringing up the persecutions of the early saints. "So many suffered in the past so it must be true." Sad and heart-rending but sadly completely irrelevant.

I had several missionary companions who would follow up continued doubts from investigators with discussions of how persecutions were prophesied for the future. These elders would explain that many of those who did not accept the gospel would actively persecute the saints. A few would also insinuate that those who did not accept the gospel were of the same ilk as those who persecuted the early saints.

There are numerous problems with persecution arguments. There is no reason to expect persecution of Mormons in the future...none. The world is actually becoming much more tolerant. People question claims daily and it does not mean they are going to persecute or harm the claimant. To plead otherwise is to create a false dichotomy and a slippery slope. It also does not mean that those who question today would have persecuted the saints in the past. In fact, history would indicate otherwise. There were many people who actively questioned Mormonism and even wrote critiques or signed affidavits concerning Mormonism or the lack of character of the leaders. Most of these people were not involved in the mobbings and other persecutions.

Occasionally, the argument is used that questioning is persecution. That is a highly debatable assumption. How do we determine if questioning is persecution? Are people being harmed by the asking of questions? What type of questions are harmful and about what subjects? So if questioning someone's faith is harmful and somehow morally suspect numerous other issues follow. If that is the case then Mormon missionaries and members engaged in spreading the gospel to family and friends are actively persecuting others on a daily basis. How can they justify the special pleading? They have the truth therefore they can question others but the favor cannot be returned?