DiscussMormonism.com

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=2&id=286

The Role of Amateurs in Book of Mormon Studies
Melvin J. Thorne

This FARMS review is an attempt to put the "amateurs" in their place. To put them in the sphere for which they were created. A limited sphere, as entirely dictated by the "in-crowd" apologists. This review by Melvin follows the well-documented "ABA" format where the TBM reviewee is patronized, then ridiculed for most of the essay, and finally patronized again at the end. Now "to his credit" (a favorite way to put it by the apologists), Melvin takes a step back, and rather than simply grabbing a hatchet and begin to slaughter his brethren, he takes a less bloodly, though equally telling route. He takes the fatherly approach to temper the youthful "ameteur enthusiasm" which strays from the sage wisdom of the elder brethren.

The criticism of the books under review, or rather, under the fatherly guidance of Melvin, begins with a familiar,

For one thing, both books are written as if in an intellectual vacuum—a vacuum of knowledge about what has been written by others. Both books could have been much stronger if their authors had drawn on the large body of research that has been published on the topics they address.

Hmmm. What research would that be?

Melvin continues to lead in with this questioning,

What is the place of amateurs in the field of Book of Mormon studies?

He illustrates the answer to his question with a story of an "amateur" medical professional that he is acquainted with. And the paternalistic lecturing begins:

The case of one very sincere student of the scriptures seems particularly instructive. He is a medical professional. He has devoted considerable time and energy to a study of a certain aspect of Book of Mormon studies and has published books on the subject. He and I have had several discussions about his books. When the FARMS Review of Books published a review criticizing one of his books for the same kind of weaknesses I have pointed out in this review, he came to me to discuss the criticisms made by the reviewer.

Are we seeing the beginning of the apologetic version of Thomas S. Monson here? "A young man came into my office, heartbroken, for he had committed sins of a serious nature. He wished to know what he could do to make his sins right in the eyes of God".

He asked how he could obtain the knowledge and tools that the reviewer criticized him for not using. When I suggested that he take a portion of the large amounts of time and energy he was currently spending on his studies and invest them in pursuing a good graduate degree from a reputable university, he didn't see the point.

Wow, so much like the story of the young man or young woman who goes to the bishop, gets some solid fatherly counsel, but then the young person in his or her spiritual immaturity doesn't grasp the weighty recommendations of his elder advisor.

(As an aside, one might not see the point when there is no graduate degree from a reputable university that has anything to do with the Book of Mormon, nor is there any serious, peer reviewed body of literature surrounding the Book of Mormon.)

Amateurs who try to address these kinds of questions (like Enslen and Partridge) without obtaining and employing the knowledge and skills of scholarship are at a distinct disadvantage. They publish books (frequently self-published, like both Enslen's and Partridge's books) and expect them to receive the same serious attention as books published by scholars

It sounds to me like many of these books receive more attention than what FARMS publishes. Remember the envious decrial of the Three Nephite book that was gearing up for another 22,000 copies to the dismay of the apologists? Since the "amateurs" have access to the writings of prophets of God, one wonders how they are at a disadvantage over the secular academics.

But we know however, that not even testimonial and doctrinal exegisis are allowed, as both turn on "scholarship" according to Louis Midgley. We also know that credentials don't mean anything unless the party line is towed, as we saw with professor Huack. Most telling about this expected conformity comes from Melvin's final fatherly ancedote, where he notes an exception to the rule. A case where an amateur in fact was able to make a meaningful contribution:

A good case in point is the work that Warren Aston has done in the Arabian Peninsula in search of Nephi's Bountiful...His persistence in examining likely candidate areas has been matched by his care to learn what others have done on the subject (for example, he contacted FARMS to learn what had been published on the subject before beginning any personal explorations and he has kept FARMS apprised of his progress so that others who might be interested in doing research on the subject could learn what he had so far discovered). And when he thought that he had identified the best candidate, he asked FARMS to help him enlist professional scholars who could verify and extend his work.

Ah yes. A fine counterexample indeed. This man was able to do his work without the requisite education, provided he first bowed to the authority of FARMS. And provided that at every step of his journy, he reported dutifully to FARMS and got their controlling nod of approval before daring to take his next.

Notice how well this last example (the bold) follows the format for prayer. "He prayed", "He told the Lord of his struggles", and "He asked the Lord for help".

An interesting development in the engagement tactics of the apologists. From "bad cop" to the ever-concerned "big brother".

Another excellent contribution to the growing body of literature. I have to say, Dr. Robbers, your thesis concerning "outsiders" and FARMS is accumulating a mountain of evidence. I find it highly compelling and persuasive.

Gadianton wrote:Most telling about this expected conformity comes from Melvin's final fatherly ancedote, where he notes an exception to the rule. A case where an amateur in fact was able to make a meaningful contribution:

A good case in point is the work that Warren Aston has done in the Arabian Peninsula in search of Nephi's Bountiful...His persistence in examining likely candidate areas has been matched by his care to learn what others have done on the subject (for example, he contacted FARMS to learn what had been published on the subject before beginning any personal explorations and he has kept FARMS apprised of his progress so that others who might be interested in doing research on the subject could learn what he had so far discovered). And when he thought that he had identified the best candidate, he asked FARMS to help him enlist professional scholars who could verify and extend his work.

Ah yes. A fine counterexample indeed. This man was able to do his work without the requisite education, provided he first bowed to the authority of FARMS. And provided that at every step of his journey, he reported dutifully to FARMS and got their controlling nod of approval before daring to take his next.

The author in question here is Warren Aston (who lives in Brisbane, QLD), with whom I had a lot of contact in the late 1980s. We were FARMS first two Aussie volunteers in the early '80s, so he has been associate with FARMS from the earliest days. Warren did send me preliminary drafts which were later to become his book, so he did "enlist" the opinions of an amateur. In the end, however, I don't think he put much weight in them, as they were mostly critical, though I think he used me as a "sounding board".

The mystery to me is why Warren seems to have almost disappeared from apologetics (though I understand he has another book coming). I've been unsuccessful in trying to find his email address, and though I do have his mailing address, getting me to write snail-mail these days is like trying to force-feed vegemite to an American greenie missionary.

Warren is, and has been, an international UFO researcher for a very long time, and an amateur in this field something like nearing 30 years. This is a field where mostly amateurs dominate, and Warren is among the most informed of the amateurs. One thing I have noticed - nothing in FARMS publications makes mention of this (though he's a prominent international UFO authority), and nothing in UFO research makes mention of Warren's involvement with FARMS. I think Warren has gone to length to avoid mention of his involvement with FARMS as far as UFO research is concerned. And I think FARMS distances itself from this "pseudo-science" of UFOlogy. Unlike many others, I do take this research seriously (and critically), but some of Warren's theories about UFOs would definitely be considered "loopy" by some/many. Likewise, many in the UFO-enthusiast community would find Warren's apologetic writings equally "loopy". It's an interesting stand-off I thought I'd mention.

The other point is that UFOlogy is in some sense a threat to accepted religious orthodoxies. I'm not sure how Warren reconciles this with his orthodox Mormon beliefs, but I doubt FARMS would be interested in pursuing that point.

The case of one very sincere student of the scriptures seems particularly instructive. He is a medical professional. He has devoted considerable time and energy to a study of a certain aspect of Book of Mormon studies and has published books on the subject. He and I have had several discussions about his books. When the FARMS Review of Books published a review criticizing one of his books for the same kind of weaknesses I have pointed out in this review, he came to me to discuss the criticisms made by the reviewer. We talked about the need to understand the body of knowledge in the area of his interest and how it applies to his ideas, to evaluate arguments and evidence (his own and those of others), to make his own assumptions clear, to reason logically, and so on. He asked how he could obtain the knowledge and tools that the reviewer criticized him for not using. When I suggested that he take a portion of the large amounts of time and energy he was currently spending on his studies and invest them in pursuing a good graduate degree from a reputable university, he didn't see the point.

He seemed to want to acquire, quickly and easily, the knowledge and skills that others have invested years in obtaining and maintaining. He wanted the fruits of that training, but he didn't want to sacrifice for it. Yet as a medical professional he certainly would not expect others to succeed in his profession without the proper training. The same is true in many fields of human endeavor; we don't expect people to succeed (and in some cases we don't even let them try) unless they are qualified by training and experience. So why should anyone expect things to be entirely different in the field of scripture scholarship?

How many Mormon scholars who publish with FARMS have degrees and academic accomplishments like this:

Professor of Bible and Ancient Near East, offers courses on Hebrew Bible; biblical and Near Eastern ritual, law, and history; and Northwest Semitic languages (Aramaic, Ugaritic, Northwest Semitic dialects) as well as courses on comparative Semitic linguistics and Hittite. His research specialties are primarily Near Eastern and biblical ritual and law in comparative perspective. He is author of the forthcoming book Inventing God's Law: How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi (Oxford University Press, due out summer, 2009). This book argues that the biblical law collection in Exodus 20:23-23:19 was created as a response to Neo-Assyrian imperialism in Israel-Judah around 700 BCE and used Hammurabi's collection as a model for both its casuistic and apodictic laws. [He] is also author of The Disposal of Impurity: Elimination Rites in the Bible and in Hittite and Mesopotamian Literature (Scholars Press, 1987) and Ritual in Narrative: The Dynamics of Feasting, Mourning, and Retaliation Rites in the Ugaritic Tale of Aqhat (Eisenbrauns, 2001). He was also chief editor of Pomegranates and Golden Bells: Studies in Biblical, Jewish and Near Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literature in Honor of Jacob Milgrom (Eisenbrauns, 1995).

This person is Professor David Wright, who has made exactly one contribution to the FARMS Review, in the first volume.

The person who responded (Journal of Book of Mormon Studies) to Wright's "Historical Criticism: A Necessary Element in the Search for Historical Truth", is Kevin Christensen:

(B.A., San Jose State University) is a freelance technical writer based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

I'm afraid that in considering Melvin Thorne's comments about the need for "gospel scholarship", what he really means is apologetic gospel scholarship. So no matter how much you know about the Bible, or how well-versed in biblical scholarship you are, it doesn't count unless you produce the "correct conclusions".

for what it's worth, DCP didn't even rate Thorne's review in his "subjective list" for that issue:

Editor's Picks
Concluding in traditional fashion, I now list certain texts or items treated in the present issue of the Review and offer my own (necessarily subjective) ratings. My opinions come, in some cases, from personal and direct acquaintance with the materials in question. In all cases, I have determined the rankings after reading the reviews featured in this issue and after further conversations either with the relevant reviewers or with those who assist in the editing of the Review. The final judgments, however, and the final blame for making them, are mine. This is how the rating system works:

**** Outstanding, a seminal work of the kind that appears only rarely.

*** Enthusiastically recommended.

**Warmly recommended.

*Recommended.

Here, then, are my ratings—at least, as of today; they could change tomorrow—for the items that we feel we can recommend from the present issue of the FARMS Review of Books:

*Lauramaery Gold, Mormons on the Internet

**Jeffrey R. Holland, Christ and the New Covenant: The Messianic Message of the Book of Mormon

**Donald W. Parry and Dana M. Pike, eds., LDS Perspectives on the Dead Sea Scrolls

**Raphael Patai, The Children of Noah: Jewish Seafaring in Ancient Times

**John W. Welch and Doris R. Dant, The Book of Mormon Paintings of Minerva Teichert

*** James W. Lucas and Warner P. Woodworth, Working toward Zion: Principles of the United Order for the Modern World

*** Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History

Gad, I have to say that I really do think that you're even better at spin and creative misreading than the Scartchmeister himself.

And that's saying a very, very great deal.

Master Scartch wrote:Another excellent contribution to the growing body of literature. I have to say, Dr. Robbers, your thesis concerning "outsiders" and FARMS is accumulating a mountain of evidence. I find it highly compelling and persuasive.

LOL. What a stunning surprise to learn that the Scartchmeister is "compelled" and "persuaded"!

The following is a standard response:

Master Scartch has devoted himself since at least 2006 to publicly defaming me while maintaining his anonymity. A particular focus of his hatred is the FARMS Review, which I founded and edit.

The FARMS Review has been appearing, now, for very nearly twenty years. The entirety of every issue of the Review is available on line, at

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/review/

Anyone interested in inspecting the FARMS Review for himself or herself, without Scartch’s defamatory spin, without Scartch’s hostile selection and editing, without looking through the distorting Scartchian lens, is entirely welcome to do so.

I regard Master Scartch as an obsessive and malevolent loon, and have decided to refrain from further gratifying his weird fixation on me and those connected with me. Attempting conversation with him over the past many months has accomplished precisely nothing, and is, plainly, a complete waste of my time -- especially given the fact that it's his self-described "mission" and "amusement" to be "perceived" by "Mopologists" as "full of hate." (Scartch, MDB, 1 October 2008)

Amateur or not, I rather like Kerry Shirts' Backyard Professor approach.

by the way, do we have professional theologians in the Church?

Likewise, many in the UFO-enthusiast community would find Warren's apologetic writings equally "loopy". It's an interesting stand-off I thought I'd mention.

Yes, well, thank you for mentioning it. Does his UFO research ever connect with his Book of Mormon research?

Gadianton wrote:
Yes, well, thank you for mentioning it. Does his UFO research ever connect with his Book of Mormon research?

I have no idea, Gad, but if I can eventually locate a direct email address for Warren, that's one of the "big questions" I'd like to ask him.

moksha wrote:by the way, do we have professional theologians in the Church?

This is an interesting question, lil penguin. We have no professional theologians in the church, not even Daniel or the Prophet. All of us are amateurs.