In the pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding, we all seek to eliminate contention (nomorecontention.com). In this post, we'll discuss multiple working hypotheses by seeing how Latter-day Saints group themselves according to their beliefs.
There is no need for anyone to feel compelled to "convert" others to their own perspectives and interpretations.
Through clarity and charity, we can all simply understand one another and live in harmony as we seek to live and share the Gospel.
But clarity is often the hard part.
_____
Latter-day Saints around the world recently reviewed the translation of the Book of Mormon during their Come Follow Me study. Numerous podcasts, articles, and blogs promoted SITH (the stone-in-the-hat narrative), leading many Latter-day Saints to wonder, what's going on?
Obviously Church leaders want us all to avoid contention about the topic. One way to do this is to teach that it doesn't matter how Joseph produced the Book of Mormon, so don't worry or even think about the historical sources. Let's just say we don't know, or that Joseph used both SITH and the Urim and Thummim.
That's probably an acceptable approach for many, if not most, Latter-day Saints who have busy lives and frankly don't care about the historical sources and the ongoing controversies about the translation. Let's say 60% of LDS are in that middle ground.
The problem with this approach is obvious in the curriculum, the Gospel Topics essays, and other media. To promote SITH, these materials simply ignore what Joseph and Oliver taught and the relevant scriptures, leaving Latter-day Saints uninformed. Sort of an "ignorance is bliss" approach that, in the long term, can cause cognitive dissonance when people eventually learn what Joseph and Oliver taught.
There are 40% of LDS who do care about the historical sources, the claims of critics and scholars, etc.
Everyone can agree on the facts, consisting of specific statements by Joseph and Oliver regarding the Urim and Thummim vs specific statement by others who promoted SITH. We can all see that the two narratives contradict one another, just as Mormonism Unvailed set forth in 1834.
E.g., https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/p/the-sith-problem-1829-2024.html
[Some LDS scholars try to reconcile the contradictions by claiming the Joseph and Oliver were referring to the seer stone when they said "Urim and Thummim," but we can all see this is a ruse that contradicts what Joseph, Oliver, David, Emma and other said.]
With the facts clearly spelled out, we can all see that differences of opinion arise from different assumptions, inferences, and theories. (This is the FAITH model of analysis.)
Of the 40% who care about the historical sources, about half, or 20%, follow the SITH scholars, such as those at Scripture Central, and agree with Royal Skousen that Joseph and Oliver intentionally misled everyone about the translation, presumably because they were "embarrassed" about the seer stone.
https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/2024/09/the-embarrassed-narrative-and-sith.html
https://www.bookofmormoncentralamerica.com/2024/11/thank-you-royal-skousen.html
The other 20% (including me) reject the SITH scholars and stick with what Joseph and Oliver said. This group has multiple working hypotheses to explain SITH. Some say the SITH witnesses were lying. Others (including me) say the SITH witnesses were not lying, but they observed a demonstration Joseph conducted (because he could not show the actual U&T or the plates) and they used the demonstration as an apologetic argument against the Spalding theory.
__________
I like the 20/60/20 principle because it explains, in general terms, many social, political, and religious divisions.
But we don't have to think of this as "division" in the Church.
We just have different assumptions, inferences, and theories.
And so long as we are clear about our views, and all rely on the full facts, it's all good.