If you like to read history, you may read about the historical problems with Mormonism. But if you don't enjoy reading history, you will be less likely to find out about the historical problems. A lack of historical curiosity puts Mormons at a disadvantage.

I worked with a guy that said he doesn't study history because it could damage his testimony.

History is very biased. Everyone’s historical account is different so the big question is whose history is accurate if any of it is.

Look at how people today are trying to erase history by tearing monuments down and changing narratives. In Germany Hitler burned books and after his demise people erased him by removing swastikas. I remember seeing a bridge in former Eastern Germany that still had swastikas on it. I was amazed the Russians didn’t remove them because they hated the Nazis probably more than we did.

History is nowhere near that difficult.

The church hid the facts of its origins for nearly 200 years but then the historians dug up the truth. The documents exist; the church cannot deny them or what they prove any more.

The same is true of Nazis, Bolshevism, the Civil War and Jim Crow, the origins of the First World War, etc. The passage of time and the deepening of research has uncovered vastly more than was known even a couple of decades ago. Are there errors? Yes, inevitably. But the degree of distortion has declined significantly and false claims are subject to more challenges than before.

Monuments are NOT history. Tearing down Hitler or Stalin monuments went hand-in-hand with improving our understanding of their roles in history. Hitler has not been "erased;" he has been revealed.

In reply to your question, "whose history is accurate" the answer is nobody's. That's the point. History is a process like physics. Was Newton right? No. Was Einstein right? No. But his approximation of reality was "righter" than Newton's. By the same token, the constant criticism of budding historians means that our understanding of most events gets better. It never becomes "right" but it grows "righter;" it grows closer to reality.

It's two steps forward, one step back, but the overall direction is positive. Thank God for that. It's why we know JS was a charlatan and a criminal; BY was a venal tyrant who inspired, if not ordered, a massacre; officially sanctioned polygamy continued after both Manifestos; and Mark Hoffman swindled God's prophets. We're better off because the process of history, the discipline, has moved us much farther towards the truth.

Nope.

It’s more accurate than you give it credit.

I would recommend using databases and studying a variety of books and research papers on historical topics.

When you take the position you are taking, it gives you an out to not dig deeply.

And that is a pity.

  
  

You can say that again.

All the knowledge, all the facts, all the history will not dent that.
Because it is first of all, an emotional bond. That's how cults work, especially when first forming.

Typically have to have some real life crisis - hey I followed all the rules, didn't pan out, something bad happens anyway - causing a questioning of belief. Then there's a searching, and then evidence e.g. history becomes suddenly important. Humans are not as rational as we like to tell ourselves.

Until then the delusion is rock solid. Take a look around.

> Because it is first of all, an emotional bond.
> That's how cults work, especially when first
> forming.

Yes.


-----------------
> Typically have to have some real life crisis - hey
> I followed all the rules, didn't pan out,
> something bad happens anyway - causing a
> questioning of belief. Then there's a searching,
> and then evidence e.g. history becomes suddenly
> important.

Yes. There are two sorts of people: those who objectively want the truth and those who are blinded and only want the truth under certain circumstances. In either case the availability of good history is important. Among cultists who are in a vulnerable place due to emotional crises, the availability of history can be life-saving. I daresay history has saved some RfM posters' lives.


-----------------
> Humans are not as rational as we like
> to tell ourselves.

I couldn't agree more.

. . . but it very often doesn't taste very good.
Can destroy the nice orderly warm secure Walt Disney-esque fantasy-world you've built. Can depress the heck out of you. Can zero you out.

But you are free.

"When you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back at you."

--Some famous guy

Beware the Abyssinians.

Well said, Benito.

Truth is an acquired taste. Helps to take small bites in the beginning until you get used to it and then little by little until you get used to it and then at some point can't live without it.

Most people like to stick to their favorite foods.

I was never into reading about mormonism or going to things like pageants, which surprises me as I was very devout.

It took my dealing with the leaders over my gay boyfriend/husband that did it for me. They are clueless and they are power hungry. It took me a long time to finally let go completely.

I bought some of the books people recommended on here and I can't read them. I've tried. I've heard enough about mormonism that I can't tolerate reading about its history. I've read what I need of the history from you guys on this board. It has been icing on the cake.

The History that gave me peace was Fawn Brodie's "No Man Knows My History". Could have been titled more accurately at the time of publication, "No Mormon Knows My History--or at least they're not telling."

I couldn't believe what I was reading. But the best part was the footnotes, the references, the newspaper clippings, court records, government records, diary entries, etc. Documentation. Like a professional biographer which is what she was. Their reputations stand or fall on verifiably accurate History. I felt like I was finally on solid ground because of that since I had left the church decades earlier because I trusted my gut.

No wonder that church took every opportunity to malign Brodie. They had nuthin'.

There's so much in this post.

History giving you peace. Often that's how it is. The history puts things in perspective, enables people to decrease their cognitive dissonance and their guilt.

The affirmation of one's internal feelings. As Dr. No suggests, people will go to great lengths to protect their cherished illusions. But for many of us there are "gut" feelings or experiences that open the door to the truth. History often helps us find that truth.

And Brodie. . . Brodie made mistakes: not many, but some. Since she was a great historian and presented her sources we could evaluate her analysis. It was much "righter" than earlier histories and hence invaluable and she gave us the tools to go farther than she. Since then Bagley has done just that, and I'm sure that Brodie as a great historian would applaud his achievement. History is an iterative process and those who honestly practice it want others to do better.

Most people don't read, let alone read history, and many of the latter only read with blinders. But for those who have eyes to see, or who are awakened by personal experience and suddenly want to know the truth, the fact that there are books out there is immensely important. History is in many cases a bridge from a confused and terrifying present to a happier and--in your word--more "peaceful" future.

I think many Mormons just don't know what they don't know.

I have a devout Mormon friend who considers herself to be very knowledgeable about church history. It seems like she's studied a fair amount, but she will only study church approved material. For example, she's studied church essays, but doesn't dig any deeper or look into other sources. She thinks the church is completely truthful. So she studies, but is also willing to accept the historical accounts and explanations that the church provides. It's something that we all probably did at one time and we thought we were knowledgeable and knew all about our church.