From time to time people ask me how my approach differs from the well-known LDS scholars, critics, podcasters, pundits, etc.
I answer that there are two frameworks that I use that they do not seem to agree with, as discussed below.
_____
1. Clarity, charity and understanding.
In my work, I pursue these three objectives. I start with clarity because so much disagreement arises from the lack of clarity. If everyone is crystal clear about what they believe and advocate, we can all make informed decisions. Charity is important because we can all assume everyone acts in good faith. And seeking understanding instead of persuasion is a key to avoiding contention, arrogance, credentialism, and other errors.
Everyone who pursues clarity, charity and understanding welcomes comparisons of different perspectives because that's how we achieve clarity, charity and understanding.
We can all see that leading LDS scholars and critics avoid comparisons of different perspectives. Scripture Central is notorious for refusing to engage in open dialog and comparisons of different perspectives about the origin and setting of the Book of Mormon, but the Interpreter, Mormon Stories, and other content creators also avoid making comparisons to enable people to make informed decisions.
In many cases, LDS scholars and critics don't even disclose all the relevant information, which leads to the second framework.
_____
2. The FAITH model.
The model is simple.
Everyone should be able to agree on the Facts. This is axiomatic, but there is tremendous resistance from LDS scholars and critics on this point.
The reasons seems to be a misunderstanding of the difference between a fact and an assumption, inference, and theory.
It's easy to see the difference. The existence of an historical document, say a letter, is a fact. The content of the letter is a fact. Everyone can agree on these.
Whether the content of the letter is factual, however, is a separate matter. Sometimes the content can be corroborated, but even then, corroboration involves assumptions, inferences, and theories.
This is why the FAITH model separates Facts from Assumptions, Inferences, and Theories. When we isolate these elements for inspection and analysis, we can see how different people arrive at different overall Hypotheses or worldviews, and then we can make informed decisions about which set of Assumptions, Inferences, and Theories make the most sense to us.
_____
One of the best examples of the FAITH model is in the New Testament.
A group of people observed Christ and heard what he taught.
19 ¶ There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?
21 Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?
(John 10:19–21)
_____
Over the last few years, I've had a variety of interactions with some LDS scholars and critics. Others have refused to even meet or have a conversation.
I welcome engagement and dialog with anyone, which few LDS scholars or critics do. Which is very strange to me, but seems to follow from their insecurity and defensiveness.