Why Nibley and Gee cannot be trusted

[_dartagnan]

I thought I would mention Nibley's awful "scholarship" with regards to his Book of Mormon apologetics. Nibley practically lies to his audience when he says the Book of Mormon provides a "quotation" from the Book of Enoch.

http://www.lds-mormon.com/nibley.shtml

I just amazes me that he could get away with this kind of thing, especially since this would have been considered proof of deception if presented by a critic.

[_Trevor]

I thought I would mention Nibley's awful "scholarship" with regards to his Book of Mormon apologetics. Nibley practically lies to his audience when he says the Book of Mormon provides a "quotation" from the Book of Enoch.

http://www.lds-mormon.com/nibley.shtml

I just amazes me that he could get away with this kind of thing, especially since this would have been considered proof of deception if presented by a critic.

Seems more like Nibley took for granted that the Book of Mormon authors knew their Enoch, and didn't bother to really argue the point at all. This is classic Nibley. No, it isn't good scholarship.

And the truth is that a number of LDS scholars make the same error inasmuch as they place implicit faith in the antiquity of the Book of Mormon and the earliest possible dating of other texts (assuming, for instance, that they are autographs and not pseudepigraphs), when dating is really the first question that needs to be addressed.

It is interesting to consider why Nibley was not more careful in his work.

[_Sethbag]

He was probably about as careful in his work as his target audience required him to be.

[_Trevor]

He was probably about as careful in his work as his target audience required him to be.

Sigh. I hope things have changed a little bit since then. I can say that I am somewhat disappointed in John Gee's work on Abraham, so maybe not as much I would like anyway.

[_dartagnan]

bump...

charity, coggins... why aren't you refuting something here?

Go back to your Gee and Nibley shrine and light candles OK?

[_dartagnan]

Where you running off to charity?

I can already hear coggins babbling at MAD, begging for more help.

[_charity]

I have read Nibley and Gee and I have read Kevin Graham and Brent Metcalfe.

I see this difference. Nibley, and Gee in less clear terms, have both stated that they were continually learning. Any scholar would do that. Nibley said in one paper that in the field of Egyptology that anything more than three years old probably should be revised.

What I see in the critics, kevin and Brent included, is that their "enligthenment" now is carved in stone.

[_Jersey Girl]

I have read Nibley and Gee and I have read Kevin Graham and Brent Metcalfe.

I see this difference. Nibley, and Gee in less clear terms, have both stated that they were continually learning. Any scholar would do that. Nibley said in one paper that in the field of Egyptology that anything more than three years old probably should be revised.

What I see in the critics, kevin and Brent included, is that their "enligthenment" now is carved in stone.

Hi charity,

I've been reading here today and want to ask you one simple question. In your view, was Gee's characterization of the KEP images, based on what you see in both sets of images provided, in error?

Jersey Girl

[_dartagnan]

Nibley, and Gee in less clear terms, have both stated that they were continually learning.

Not when it comes to learning things that fly in the face of their apologetics. In these cases, there is no learning required, only obfuscation and spin. Their minds have already been made up as to what can be learned. Any conclusions that undermine their theological convictions must be avoided, not learned. So stop pretending these guys are open minded.

Nibley said in one paper that in the field of Egyptology that anything more than three years old probably should be revised.

Nibley wasn't an Egyptologist, so what business do you have taking him as an authority on things Egyptological?

But no, that isn't what he said. Do you even know what he said?

Quick, go run to MAD and have someone dig it up for you.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

How would Metcalfe know? Well, Metcalfe had previously obtained color photos of the KEP from Steve Christensen, who was commissioned by the Church to photograph them before he was killed by Mark Hoffman.

Christensen was commissioned by the Church, you say?