“Faith is the substance of things hoped for,” Hebrews 11:1 reads, “the evidence of things not seen.” Hmm. Faith is the evidence of things not seen. Does this mean faith is the evidence we have of things not seen? Or could we say it this way: faith is the level of confidence we feel toward a truth-claim or proposed reality which we have not seen based on the degree of evidence we have accumulated of its truthfulness and existence? 

If so, is this why the Lord’s prescription in D&C 88:118 for those who “have not faith” is for them to seek learning? Is he suggesting that by diligently studying wisdom from the “best books” we will find evidences of the unseen that will enlarge our faith?

Today on Church History Matters Casey and Scott explore this idea of evidence-based faith-seeking as a way to understand each of the thinking skills and mental frameworks they've explored throughout this series. Could it be that for some of us at least, the best way to strengthen our faith is to gather evidences of the unseen by combining good thinking tools with a study of great source material? Quite possibly. But as today’s discussion makes plain, there is also a deep need to add to this approach a few crucial attributes as well. 

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

Facts don’t interpret themselves. People interpret facts. And the people best equipped to most accurately interpret facts are those who understand the contexts in which those facts were originally embedded. This is especially important in understanding Church History because a fact—especially a potentially shocking or scandalous sounding fact—isolated from its context is a fact certain to be misunderstood. This reality is too often leveraged by critics against Church members as a weapon of mass deception which has troubled many a testimony.

This is why in this episode of Church History Matters we discuss the crucial skill of properly contextualizing facts so we know what kind of meaning to give them and how to feel about them. We then demonstrate how this skill works with some real-life, potentially shocking examples.  

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

A fundamental moment in all good learning is that moment where we modify our assumptions about the world as a result of acquiring new and more accurate knowledge. This in turn hopefully primes us to make better decisions. On one level, it’s what learning is all about. Sounds pretty basic right? Well, it is. But it isn’t always easy. Church History can teach us that modifying one’s assumptions can be a challenge for some when it requires them to rethink their ideas about God, prophets, and the Church. 

In this episode of Church History Matters we’re going to carefully look at this skill of humbly revising our assumptions in light of better or more accurate information—a skill we’re calling “mental flexibility”—and then take a look at key moments in the lives of a few people in our Church’s history that show us why this skill is so crucial for durable discipleship.

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

How can we confidently discern the difference between a reliable historical claim and an unreliable one? This is what Casey and I discussed in our last episode where we introduced five source critical questions we can all ask to carefully assess the reliability of a historical truth claim.  

In this episode of Church History Matters, we’re going to practice putting these five questions to work by actually using them to measure and evaluate various historical truth-claims about the witnesses of the Book of Mormon—a very high stakes topic with conflicting claims in the historical record.

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

How can we know what actually happened in the past? Whose stories are true? Piecing together accurate history can be tricky business. People in the past, like people today, were diverse. Some were honest. Some were not. Some were straight shooting truth tellers who gave honest (though subjective) accounts of what happened. Others emphasized or omitted specific details in ways that would serve their particular agenda. So, how should we think about and evaluate the reliability of historical claims and assertions to discern what is historically accurate from what is mistaken or misleading?

In this episode of Church History Matters, we dig into the basic toolbox trained historians use in their efforts to be “source critical.” And being source critical essentially means caring about where our information is coming from and being honest about what that information can and cannot tell us. It means we recognize that not all historical claims are created equal and so we aim to use only the best data to inform our understanding of the past. And while we cannot always protect ourselves from deception, developing the skill being source critical will greatly reduce the odds that we will be misled. So, in short, today is our crash course in learning how to think like a historian. 

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

How can we confidently determine what is and what is not reliable doctrine so we can decide what to believe? This is what Casey and I discussed in our last episode where we introduced what we called the Three Doctrinal Lenses, or criteria, by which we can assess the doctrinal reliability of a truth claim.  

In today’s episode of Church History Matters, we’re going to practice putting these three lenses to work by actually using them to measure and evaluate various theological truth-claims to determine the level of confidence we have in them. So, welcome to Scott and Casey’s doctrinal workshop! 

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

Just before he left home for college, eighteen year old Henry Eyring, the future world renowned LDS scientist, was invited by his father, Edward Eyring, to sit down for some fatherly counsel. After sharing his firm conviction that Joseph Smith was a true prophet whom God used to restore his church, Edward said to his son, “Now, there are a lot of other matters which are much less clear to me. But in this Church you don’t have to believe anything that isn’t true.”

In this Church you don’t have to believe anything that isn’t true. Hmm. This echoes President Dieter F. Uchtdorf’s teaching when he declared, “Latter-day Saints are not asked to blindly accept everything they hear. We are encouraged to think and discover truth for ourselves. We are expected to ponder, to search, to evaluate, and thereby to come to a personal knowledge of the truth.” 

So, how do we do this when it comes to theological or doctrinal truth? How can we confidently determine what is and what is not reliable doctrine so we can decide what to believe? 

In this episode of Church History Matters we dive into this very question and explore three vital questions to ask when evaluating all doctrinal truth claims.

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

What is truth? What does it mean to really “know” something? And what are the best methods and tools to come to know a thing? 

In today’s episode of Church History Matters, we begin our new series on Good Thinking where we explore the important role our brain and intellect play in truth seeking and the life of faith. Specifically in this series we want to explore what mental moves are made, or what frameworks of thinking are used by intelligent, critically thinking Latter-day Saints whose faith is strengthened rather than damaged by diving deeply into our Church’s history and doctrine. So this should be fun.

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

There was in 2nd Century BC Egypt an indisputable multicultural sharing of religious ideas between Jews, Greeks, and Egyptians. How should that fact influence how we evaluate Joseph Smith’s interpretations of the Abraham facsimiles in general and individual hieroglyphics on the facsimiles specifically? 

On a related note, some of Joseph’s descriptions of Facsimile #2 contain temple themes, saying more will be revealed about those in the temple. Can Egyptologists today read those hieroglyphs? And are they actually connected in any way to what we learn about in our modern temples? 

Also, Dr. Robert Ritner is an Egyptologist who has critiqued LDS scholarship on the Book of Abraham. Has he been adequately responded to? 

And finally, what are the top three most solid intellectual evidences for the book of Abraham having ancient connections which Joseph Smith could not have known about?

In today’s episode of Church History Matters, we dive into all of these questions and more with Dr. Kerry Muhlestein, an Eyptologist and scholar on the Book of Abraham. 

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/   

So, the Book of Abraham is the touchpoint of some serious controversies—and we’ve talked about some of those in our last two episodes and we’ll probably talk about them more next week as well. But, to be clear, the Book of Abraham is also the source of some dazzling doctrinal gems which validate and expand upon other key restoration teachings. 

So, in this episode of Church History Matters we leave the controversial to bask, however briefly, in what makes the book of Abraham beautiful to us. 

For show notes and transcript for this and other episodes go to https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/church-history-matters-podcast/