“And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that
wicked one who was a liar from the beginning” (D&C 93:24).
Honest students of history
have the dilemma of sorting through what is true and what is false. This
is true of the history of any subject, but becomes particularly important in
matters of religion.
At times, this is easy to
do. Blatant lies are often easy to detect, especially when not
substantiated by other contemporaneous accounts. But when the perpetrator
of an historical event is himself misinformed, or wittingly or unwittingly
exaggerates or leaves out important details, it becomes rather difficult for
the reader to sort through the data and develop an accurate picture.
Latter-day Saint history is
filled with the miraculous, and with accounts of God’s dealings with men in our
own day. Many of the accounts are both faithful and faith-promoting. These recorded events, like ancient scripture, invite you
to improve upon your time and to obtain from God what others have
received. It is appropriate for us to be excited about and delight in the
retelling of these accounts.
Some events in our history
are ugly and alarming. Plenty of Mormons refuse to acknowledge
this. Other folks, however, may be constituted so as to acknowledge nothing but the ugly. Some go to great lengths to point out
discrepancies, errors, failings, and lies. Various authors may or may not
choose to confront certain events from our past. Both sides are
inevitably criticized by the others who disagree with the approach they’ve
taken to the study of the faith.
Much of the time, reaching
a sound conclusion about a matter requires you to exhaust the resources
available to you. Adding up the details, while considering the pertinent
context, paints the true picture. At times you will be forced to choose
between sources, as one may present a different view of the events than
another. You may choose to believe one man’s witness as credible and
honest, for instance, while putting off ten other witnesses who all agree with
one another, but who propound a contrary view to the one. That is every
man’s prerogative. You may not know about the ten other witnesses at all.
Perhaps you will choose to suspend judgment on a matter for now.
Whatever the case, these things take work.
We need context to truly
understand people and events. Ignoring some aspects of the overall
context could cause us to miss out on some truth. Without understanding
the cultural context surrounding the massacre at Mountain Meadows, for example,
it is impossible to begin to understand the event. The culture of violent
rhetoric that preceded the massacre helps you not only understand how such an
event could have transpired, but provides a lens through which to discern
varying contemporaneous accounts that were given of it.
Historians only offer their opinions about what really
happened in the past. They pick and choose their sources according to
their motive, and present the data they've gathered. Some are more honest
than others; some more intelligent. Usually, an eager student of the
gospel will find his opinion may change a number of times about a doctrine or
historical event depending on which sources he encounters, when,
and to which sources he gives credence.
Having done these things,
you also must consider
prophetic descriptions of our day - as found in the scriptures - to inform your
reading of history. Without the context of prophecy, events in our
history can bend to fit the desired outcome of any historian; or any student.
When we take the prophecies seriously, we begin to see that our
traditional telling of some aspects of Mormon history may be off. We've sorely neglected the prophecies of the Book of Mormon in this regard.
No comments:
Post a Comment