Researching in that way leads to a type of historical schizophrenia. For example, historians who cite Emma Smith’s comments as proof that Joseph used a seer stone, but then reject Emma’s claim that Joseph never practiced polygamy…. which was made in the very same document, by the very same person, at the very same time? In essence their flawed position is that only Emma’s comments that support their views are credible, while those that do not support their views are not credible.
I am so thankful for revealed truth from a flawless source. I am thankful for the counsel of President Nelson “If we are to have any hope of sifting through the myriad of voices and the philosophies of men that attack truth, we must learn to receive revelation.”