I think we’ve all heard the story of missionaries learning that their investigators are getting “anti-Mormon” information from a friend, their pastor (I was going to say “minister”, but they could be LDS now!) or the internet. The missionaries counter by using a well-worn simile saying if a person wants to know about a Ford car, they wouldn’t go to a Chevy dealer, and in a like manner if they wanted to know about Mormon’s, they should talk to a Mormon (the missionaries in this case). This sounds good at first blush, but then breaks down once examined.
The last time you purchased a new car, did you go to the dealer and ask about the car, or did you first go to Consumer Reports, or some other unbiased source for a review of the car? Nobody is going to believe the salesman when he tells you his brand is the most reliable, best value, etc. You don’t believe him/her, because that person has a conflict of interest. They will gain from selling you a car (money in the form of a commission), so they have an incentive if not to outright lie, to try to cover up the any perceived deficiencies in the car.
If you are buying a used car, are you going to believe the previous owner when he tells you the car runs great, and has never been in an accident? Or will you take it for a test drive, check Carfax, and then take the car to a mechanic for a PPI (Pre Purchase Inspection)? The mechanic will have no skin in the game, and will tell you how well the can has been taken care of, and if there have been any major repairs done on it.
In each of these cases, you need to find an unbiased third partly (Consumer Reports, the local mechanic) to provide the information you need to make a wise decision. But how does a person find an unbiased third partly when it comes to religion, and especially the Mormon religion? Is there a “Consumer Reports of Religion” that will give you a fair comparative report?
I don’t think web sites of former Mormons would be unbiased. Sites like Mormon Think looks like a pretty fair site form a quick look, but has an agenda. The best I could come up with is non-LDS historians with no ax to grind. The last book I read that I would classify in that category is American Crucifixion by Alex Beam. This is a book are the death/murder of Joseph Smith. Beam is a historian who has written books on diverse subjects such as Mental Hospitals, and a feud between Vladimir Nabokov and Edmund Wilson (I have no idea who they are). I also listened to a podcast where John Dehlin interviews Beam. Beam came across as just a regular guy who thought this would be interesting to write about. He knew nothing about Mormonism, so had to do some research on that before he could even start with the Joseph Smith Nauvoo history, the printing press, and the murder.
So what unbiased sources do you use? What would you recommended to a friend that is investigating the church?
Wheat & Tares 
I think the comparison between Consumer Reports and Car Fax and religions is an analogy that does not work because unlike cars there is no agreed upon metric that describes what someone wants out of a religion.A car we can measure things like whether or not the car was in an accident. How many miles it has, etc. Both religion and history lack these features. By your measuring stick if I want to learn about Islam I should read non-Islamic scholars. If I want to learn about the third world I should read from people in more affluent countries.
Beam has his biases, as do Bushman, Ann Taves, Dan Vogel, and yours truly. I think what is more important than searching for the source untouched by bias is recognizing the bias in each author and recognizing what the source can and cannot tell you. The key is reading a variety of viewpoints, finding the points of consensus and seeing where viewpoints diverge and figure out why. I generally categorize people into four categories 1-The interested outsider (non-lds scholars who are interested in Mormons and write in an overall admiring tone). I would include Ann Taves, John Turner in this category Non-scholarly work I would put in this category would be The Lost Book of Mormon by Avi Steinberg. 2- The disinterested insider (while also has an overall admiring tone, is not afraid to include bad facts and challenge old paradigms) I would include Bushman, Givens and Laurel Thatcher Ulrich in this category. 3- The skeptic (whether former or never Mormon, this is material clearly written to inspire skepticism in LDS truth claims) would include Letter to a CES director, Mormon Think, etc. 4- True believers (books by GAs, FAIR and FARMS)
I do encourage people to begin with the interested outsider and the disinterested insider. But I do think that reading from skeptics and believers is part of a well rounded diet. Although I think the disinterested insider and the interested outsider can give you a pretty good overview, I think that in the attempt to stay above the fray there is always something lacking. That said, most scholarly published work is from the first two categories, so to get a diet of 3 and 4 I generally recommend blogs.
So rather than finding one non-biased source what I would recommend someone do is, let’s say they wanted to know about Joseph Smith, I would recommend:
1- Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman
2- No Man Knows My History by Fawn Brodie
3-Joseph Smith The Making of a Prophet by Dan Vogel
Brigham Young-
Pioneer Prophet by John Turner
American Moses by Leonard Arrington
A Concise Biography of the American Moses by Ed Breslin
Anyone wanting to do justice to historical or religious figures or events will inevitably have to read multiple sources (IMHO) to get a good grasp whether that is Joseph Smith or Muhammad.
I never heard the Ford analogy on my mission.
I think God would be a pretty unbiased source. Ask him.
I have heard that analogy and like most analogies, it works to an extent then starts having trouble. And if we are talking used cars, look no further than CarFax.
But the topic of where to get information is an important topic. I do agree with Jason B’s comments that you should read from a variety of viewpoints to get your best perspective. You will assume each one has a bit of bias or missing/distorted info. But that is the easiest way to get the best picture. If one is way off from all the others, it makes sense to understand why and either discount their view or lean heavy on it.
In thinking of this within Mormondom, I do think many people are not all that interested in facts. They go with it because of how they feel. I have meet a few that really could care less about almost any of the history. So they buy a car because of how it feels, not because of a high rating in consumer reports,
http://Www.gospeltangents.com!
I was trying to think about this…I think that the metaphor to physical products with relatively objective features is probably off the mark (but I think that the conventional idea gets things more wrong than it gets right. That is, if I am looking to buy a car, I would trust the car manufacturer *less* than I would its competitors.)
I think that I would consider a better analogy to be thinking about experiences and services that have a subjective customer satisfaction element.
So, instead, I might consider, say, how I would evaluate a cruise line.
And here, I would say that I wouldn’t really necessarily want an “objective” opinion. I’d want to know about how people actually enjoyed or did not enjoy the cruise — and in particular, I’d want to see any reviews that matched my perspective (so if someone disliked the cruise for a reason that was irrelevant to me, that would not affect my decision.)
In this case, when I think about how I look at customer reviews, I *do* pay a lot of attention to low reviews. I compare them against high reviews to see if there is any commonality, to see if either set has any exaggerations. But ultimately, the most important thing would be to see which group resonates more with me, my personality, my tastes, my likes and dislikes, etc., Again, as I noted before, a bad review from someone who seems drastically different from me wouldn’t get that much weighting to me because I could note that it doesn’t seem likely to be close to *my* experience.)
So, I actually do think that it would be worthwhile to listen to the former religious adherents in balance with the current practitioners..
Ok.
Andrew made me think.
I’ve spent the past few years evaluating backpacking tents.
Invariably there are trade-offs. Size. Weatherproofing. Freestanding. Weight. Durability. Ventilation (a tent can do that too well as well as too poorly). Area of intended use (desert use is a lot different than where it rains a lot, snow and wind can make a huge difference for some tents).
“Ten best” lists will often include some that are perfect for some uses and unacceptable for others.
Which is why (as Andrew noted) ratings by people with intended uses like mine are really important to me.
I’ve actually stood in line at an REI garage sale behind someone who had returned a tent was just in front of me and it was being bought by the person in front of him—and we both agreed she was buying exactly the right tent.
Applying that to religion is an interesting idea.
If I am going to find out what a Catholic believes, I am going to ask a Catholic and research Catholic teachings and doctrine from Catholic sources. If I am going to find out about Catholic history, I am going to research a variety of historical sources, giving more weight to those that use primary sources as mush as possible.
The Ford analogy (used in my mission as well), doesn’t quite fit right for me. I love Jason B’s dividing lines, but I have a feeling most people won’t do that much work. When I asked myself ‘What do I evaluate regularly and how do I do so?’ what I came up with was books. I buy a lot of books. I rely on podcasts, recommendations, ads, etc., to get ideas. I never buy without going to Amazon to check the ratings. I rarely look at the five stars (which would be the all-in-Mormons). I usually start with 1 star (anti-Mormons) and depending on what those say I work my way up to the three stars. Whether or not I buy the book comes down to not the fact that the negative reviews exist (if there aren’t any negative reviews, I won’t buy a book), but what they are.
In my view, one cannot do better than Greg Prince. Reading his books about Leonard Arrington and David O. Mckay have done more for my enotional and spiritual health than most anything else. What did they give me??? They gave me perspective; which has helped me in governing The Church…instead of The Church governing me.