Disagreements and controversies are part of life. They seem to be especially intense in matters of faith or religion. As Christians, we have a responsibility to pursue truth. Jesus said, “you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32 ESV). Obviously, what Jesus says here applies first and foremost to knowing the truth about Jesus himself, who is “the Truth” (John 14:6). It also applies more broadly to all of God’s word (John 17:17), which we have in written form in Scripture. 

Not only with regard to the Bible, but also regarding other people and their beliefs, we ought to seek to be well informed and accurate in what we say. Just as we want others to represent our views fairly, we ought to strive to represent the views of others fairly. This is just an application of the Golden Rule that Jesus taught (see Matt. 7:12). Like everyone else I know, I want other people to understand me. I do not like it when other people lie about me or carelessly misrepresent what I believe. Since I want other people to talk about my positions fairly and accurately, I ought to make every effort to do for others in this regard what I would like them to do for me, by speaking about what they believe as carefully, clearly, and correctly as I can. It’s also the wise course of action: “If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame” (Prov. 18:13). In other words, if you criticize what someone says before you understand it, you’ll just look stupid! 

The Mormon writer Stephen Covey, in his bestselling book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, enunciates the same principle as what he calls the Fifth Habit: “Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood.” By the way, this is a good example of the fact that people with whom we disagree religiously and theologically can get some things right. We should acknowledge that fact whenever we can. Doing so will go a long way toward having constructive discussions about our very real disagreements. 

It should be obvious that the place to begin when trying to understand what others believe is to listen to what they say. When the subject is what a particular religion teaches, one needs to look at the religion’s own publications. The same principle applies when the subject is what a specific individual teaches or taught—we want to look at what that individual actually said. So we might have the following three scenarios: 

• If I want to know what Jim, the Jehovah’s Witness at my door, believes, I ask him.
• If I want to know what the Jehovah’s Witnesses currently teach, I consult their current, official publications (of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society).
• If I want to know what Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the religion, taught, I examine his own writings.

Note that these can be, and often are, three different questions with different answers. The Watchtower Society’s teachings today differ in some significant ways from the teachings of Charles Taze Russell. And although Jehovah’s Witnesses tend to be highly uniform in their beliefs, what Jim the Jehovah’s Witness believes might be somewhat different from what “the Organization” teaches. 

Other religious groups tend to have a lot of diversity of viewpoints among their members. At the opposite extreme from the uniformity of Jehovah’s Witness beliefs, the New Age movement encompasses a bewildering variety of religious and “spiritual” positions. Some New Agers believe in reincarnation, some don’t, and those who do believe in it interpret the meaning of reincarnation differently. Members of the Unitarian-Universalist Association may profess affinity for Buddhism, Islam, Wicca (modern witchcraft), atheistic humanism, or even liberal Christianity (but not evangelical Christianity!). In such cases it is especially important to ask individuals what they personally believe.

If a publication comes from the religious figure you’re trying to understand (say, Mary Baker Eddy, founder of Christian Science) or from the religion itself (such as the LDS Church), such a publication is what researchers call a primary source. Publications that comment on or criticize the primary sources are called secondary sources. In emphasizing the importance of primary sources, I’m not disparaging secondary sources. Contrary to what members of such religions sometimes claim, it’s not wrong to consult secondary sources from authors outside the religion being discussed. Outsiders of a religion can often provide telling insights into what that religion teaches. The best resources by outsiders will document their analysis of the religion’s teachings from the primary sources of that religion’s most authoritative or representative literature.

Finally, let me briefly offer some tips for making good use of the sources available to you. 

• If you’re using a secondary source, pay close attention to the primary sources it uses. If possible, find the primary sources and look up what they say and read them for yourself.
• Secondary sources often provide direct quotations from primary sources. Again, it’s a good idea to check these quotes to make sure they are accurate. I’m afraid sometimes statements get quoted inaccurately.
• When you look up a quotation, read around it in order to make sure its meaning has been accurately represented. IRR has some helpful resources that make this easy to do, such as the manual Where Does It Say That? (documenting LDS history and teachings). Reading a bit before the quote and a bit after it is usually enough to confirm the validity of how the quote was presented. In some instances, a quote may be worded accurately but its context was misunderstood. Perhaps the person being quoted was joking, or talking about a belief he rejected, or addressing a different subject.
• Give people the benefit of the doubt as to their sincerity. On the other hand, if there is good reason to think that the speaker or writer was being less than fully transparent, or even lying, that possibility should be taken seriously.

The general principle here is simple: Follow the evidence wherever it leads.