Nibley: Footnote faker or not?

[_Lemmie]

I indirectly wrote that I believe "the folks" are the main supporters/defenders and the ones that basically made him a successful scholar...read through the book reviews and search pro LDS message boards, it really paints a positive acceptance of him with the folks .

I also believe scholars and apologists for the most part will only support him when he agrees with their current thought or paper. Also, as time goes on his scholarship will be shelved in academia, and his legend will grow with the folks and "the church," as long as it compliments their testimonies and helps "the church" survive.

i agree it's the "folks' who keep him in the limelight if that's the word- funny it's not a Sperry or Welch or Allen or even a ugh DCP or Geeman.

any notable Phd candidates under the Nibster's supervision?

k

Hi k, maybe you can answer my question then, to whom does the term 'folks' refer?

[_Markk]

I've been out forever, apparently (not that I'm complaining!)-- but who are "the folks?"

Everyday Mormons...like I wrote read the book reviews...these are the folks.

This book is amazing! He very precisely and succinctly proves that Joseph Smith could not have ever written the Book of Mormon without divine intervention. It is a wonderful dive into the history and stories of these people, the band of Lehi, and the Jaredites. He gives such a complete and in depth picture of their lives, their customs and their language. I am swimming in tidbits of facts that he has provided. I loved this book! I will read it again and again. There is so much more to be had from the Book of Mormon than just what is on the surface, and Hugh Nibley gives us a nice chunk of knowledge to guide our way into the lives of these people. (less)

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3992 ... _Jaredites

[_Lemmie]

I've been out forever, apparently (not that I'm complaining!)-- but who are "the folks?"

Everyday Mormons...like I wrote read the book reviews...these are the folks.

Thank you, but no, I won't be chasing down book reviews to try to understand your casual, blurry use of a term. I am beginning to understand your approach.

[_Markk]

Thank you, but no, I won't be chasing down book reviews to try to understand your casual, blurry use of a term. I am beginning to understand your approach.

LOL...I suppose that was too difficult for you to understand.

[_Lemmie]

Thank you, but no, I won't be chasing down book reviews to try to understand your casual, blurry use of a term. I am beginning to understand your approach.

LOL...I suppose that was too difficult for you to understand.

More of your approach. Got it.

[_Markk]

Thank you, but no, I won't be chasing down book reviews to try to understand your casual, blurry use of a term. I am beginning to understand your approach.

LOL...I suppose that was too difficult for you to understand.

More of your approach. Got it.

How is offering to you a objective way to see some of whom I called the folks a "approach?"

If you can't figure out who the "folks" are in a LDS construct...how about if I just say Mormons that aren't apologists and scholars who are searching for answers?

[_Lemmie]

How is offering to you a objective way to see some of whom I called the folks a "approach?"

well, just that fact that you are defining your answer as 'objective' answers THAT question.

If you can't figure out who the "folks" are in a LDS construct...how about if I just say Mormons that aren't apologists and scholars who are searching for answers?

You're right, if I can't 'figure out who the 'folks' are in a LDS construct,' my multiple generations of Mormon ancestors on both sides of my family tree are going to be Soooo disappointed in me! I'll live.

If you would like to arbitrarily define 'folks' in that manner, fine. Like I said, I'm understanding your approach.

[_Markk]

You're right, if I can't 'figure out who the 'folks' are in a LDS construct,' my multiple generations of Mormon ancestors on both sides of my family tree are going to be Soooo disappointed in me! I'll live.

If you would like to arbitrarily define 'folks' in that manner, fine. Like I said, I'm understanding your approach.

We have one thing in common, LDS both sides...maybe we are cousins.

[_kairos]

Can anyone identify one or more Mormon "scholars" who received their PHD's under Herr DR. Nibley's supervision?

k

[_Kishkumen]

Can anyone identify one or more Mormon "scholars" who received their PHD's under Herr DR. Nibley's supervision?

k

Usually, but not always, it is the professor in a program offering a PhD who advises aspiring doctoral students. I am not aware of Nibley ever having been in a department that regularly granted PhDs.

There were some odd cases of BYU students earning PhDs the mechanisms of which I did not fully understand. For example, Richard Draper got his PhD at BYU. His dissertation was on the pontifex, a Roman priesthood. I have even, remarkably enough, seen it cited in other publications on the topic. But I have no idea through which program he got said PhD. It was most likely not through the Department of Humanities, Classics, and Comparative Literature at BYU, which does not, as far as I know, have any PhD programs.

I liked Draper, by the way. I don't regard him as a great scholar, but he was a very nice fellow. He is really a product of CES.

In any case, I don't recall that Nibley ever directed a dissertation. He may have. I just don't know.