In this post on Worlds Without End Brain Whitney argues that the disaffected should not say the church lied to them.
While the church is, without question, paying the price for promoting an overly-simplified “heritage” approach to history, I don’t think the motive was based in intentional deception; rather, I think the disinclinations towards academic approaches to history were based in sincere love for the church and a desire to protect it. Many, including President Packer, felt that advertising our flaws was tantamount to handing our critics information on a silver platter that they could manipulate against us. I believe that the leaders of the church who were reticent towards candid historical examination were not so because they had some sense that the church was built on lies, but instead because they sincerely believed it to be true; and that they distrusted the historian’s craft that tended to remove the spiritual aspects of the faith that were (and still are) viewed as vital to building and maintaining a testimony. I have no doubt that, in their eyes, they were not suppressors of truth as much as they were being the dutiful watchmen along the tower.
I see this point of view sometimes and I'd like to engage it a little.
Yes, it's worthwhile to understand how we got here. And yes their intention might have been good from their own point of view. But none of that changes the end result, which was a history taught and seminary and sunday school that had been almost completely whitewashed.
Packers intent was clear, promote faith by telling one side of the story. How is not that dishonesty? If I sold you a car only telling you the positive information, have I not deceived? Or is it because it's a religion that it is suddenly not a lie? Should I hold religion to a different or lower standard?
I think the intent here is to neuter criticism of the church. You can contextualize and add nuance all day but the end result still stands. They intentionally told half truths and intentionally omitted information to sell their religion. How is that not a lie?