Are Mormons completely asking the wrong question when they pray If they should believe the Book of Mormon is true? The verse says to “ask if these things are not true.” So wouldn’t a burning sensation be evidence that “these things are NOT true?
In my opinion, although the scripture is worded that way, I am fairly confident that nearly everyone that prays about the Book of Mormon does so in the affirmative.The initial objective of reading the Book of Mormon is typically to find out if it is Another Testament of Jesus Christ, written by ancient prophets, and translated through a modern prophet by the gift and power of God.In asking God, I believe the general approach is to confirm that it is true, not that it is not true.
What do you think about the Enola Gay controversy? Which side are you leaning more towards to?
It didn't bring much credit to any side of the debate. It was one of the opening shots in the "Culture Wars" in American politics and much more about politics than history. The Smithsonian, who planned an exhibit that covered a lot of ground and included contentions that were controversial, particularly the contention that a US invasion of Kyushu would have cost only 56,000 American lives, should have known better. The original exhibit sought to put the atomic bombings in context, but a rather narrow context, focusing on 1945, rather than a broader picture of the war. The curators of the exhibit knew they were courting criticism from some quarter whatever they did but did not put in enough work building support for the exhibit among the historians who advised the curators or the wider community of historians, particularly the Organization of American Historians.The Smithsonian should have realized that the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II and the atomic bombings at the height of the "Greatest Generation" historical boom required a great deal of tact, and a general airing of contentions that were far from a settled consensus, would attract criticism. On the other side, the American Legion, the Air Force Association and certain politicians in Congress came off as philistines. Their objections to the Smithsonian exhibit - some of which were well grounded - boiled down to those who lived through the time owned the history and had veto power over any dissenting historical opinion, which, of course, got the back up of a lot of historians who blasted back about censorship.The one good thing about the whole flap was it did inspire reexamination of the atomic bombings and American historiography on the subject is more balanced and nuanced after it than before it. If you are looking for an even-handed account of the controversy, I recommend Michael J. Hogan's essay The Enola Gay Controversy: History, Memory, and the Politics of Presentation in the collection Hiroshima in History and Memory. All the book's essays touch on the controversy in one manner or another.