The 2016 Sampson Avard Golden Scepter Award

[_Doctor Scratch]

Colleagues & Friends, it's that time once again. Each autumn season, we gather together once again as brothers and sisters engaged in mutually beneficial intellectual pursuits in order to honor someone in the realm of Mopologetics Studies. It was Dean Robbers who established this award some time ago as a means of recognizing someone--virtually always a TBM--"whose role in the course and/or study of Mopologetics has had an enormous and undeniable impact on the field." 2016 has been a remarkably slow year for the Mopologists, with some expert observers even going to so far as to suggest that Mopologetics--for all intents and purposes--is "dead," or, perhaps even worse, that it has entered into something like a "post-Mopologetics" state.

In any event, this year's honoree stands out for all sorts of reasons--he is a well-known figure in Mormon Studies and admirably well-published author. But he is this year's recipient of the Sampson Avard Golden Scepter Award thanks to his tidy yet devastating undoing of decades of Mopologetic orthodoxy. Ladies and gentleman, I hope you'll join me in congratulating Dr. Grant Hardy!



In a mostly uneventful year, Dr. Hardy's talk at FAIR Conference did more to undo Mopologetic assumptions that perhaps any other single talk in Mopologetic history. In one fell swoop--on their own home turf and at their own conference--Dr. Hardy declared publicly that belief in a historical Book of Mormon is unnecessary for entry into the Celestial Kingdom. This immediately sent the apologists into a tail spin, with many of them exclaiming that this was their belief, too! Only for them to later backtrack and insist that if anyone doubts the LGT, he or she is probably teetering on the brink of apostasy.

In any event, I hope you will all join me in congratulating Dr. Hardy on his impressive accomplishment!

[_Dr. Shades]

Congratulations to Dr. Hardy! What a well-deserved award to such a well-deserving candidate.

In the write-up, the presenter wrote:

Only for them to later backtrack and insist that if anyone doubts the LGT, he or she is probably teetering on the brink of apostasy.

When you say "later," wasn't that "later" a little less than 48 hours?

[_cwald]

Congratulations Dr. Hardy.

[_Kishkumen]

I offer a hearty congratulations to Dr. Hardy. I was rather surprised to learn of his tolerance for those who do not believe the Book of Mormon to be an ancient text. Years ago, Dr. Hardy was instrumental in banishing from BYU the wonderful scholarly event known as the Book of Mormon Roundtable, which attracted such luminaries as Richard Bushman and Elaine Pagels to BYU in order to discuss the Book of Mormon but not necessarily from a believing perspective or as an ancient text. Bushman was excited about the event, seeing it as wonderfully productive to be able to bring together so many viewpoints in a constructive enterprise, but Dr. Hardy thought it was inappropriate to have a discussion of the Book of Mormon that included non-believing perspectives at BYU. Not only did the event get published, but its author was pushed off campus too (Mark D. Thomas, the author of Digging in Cumorah).

Has Dr. Hardy changed his view? Or would he still say that no such conversation should happen on BYU campus? Should Elaine Pagels not be invited to share her respectful but non-believing thoughts on the Book of Mormon? What does it say about academic freedom at BYU tht some ideas are deemed too dangerous or corrupting even to be expressed on campus?

As a professor working at a major state university, Dr. Hardy surely has thoughts on that. Maybe he would say that while it is appropriate for all ideas to receive a hearing at a state institution, BYU must banish some ideas lest they facilitate students drawing undesirable conclusions.

In any case, congratulations, Dr. Hardy. I hope you have thought better of your actions with regard to the Book of Mormon Roundtable. It is troubling to hear of an academic fighting academic freedom on a university campus, but I suppose you felt justified by your obligations to the sensitivities of tender Mormon testimonies that are not resilient when they encounter different ideas about certain topics. That or you understood that the Brethren and many parents of BYU students could not handle such a thing happening.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

What a wonderful nomination, Dr. Scratch!

I perused Dr. Hardy's CV and noticed listed his 2010 groundbreaking tome: Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide (1st Edition) which, of course, spurred a curiosity in me that just could not be sated. I searched amazon hoping to add it to my cart for later digestion in my study paired with Johann Christian Bach's symphony in G-minor (naturally) and a Dr. Pepper in my Schott Zwiesel snifter.

Well, lo and behold, who is to be found among Dr. Hardy's acolytes offering up a robust and glowing review of said publication but our very own Blair Hodges!

5.0 out of 5 stars

Highly recommended analysis of the Book of Mormon
By Blair Hodges on April 3, 2010

Format: Hardcover

In one corner Skeptical-Critic shuffles his feet as he knocks his gloves together. In the other corner Believer- Apologist ghosts jabs, bobbing up and down. At the back of the arena Indifferent-Non-believer and Didactic-Believer glance in the direction of the main event, feeling a little out of place. Standing at center ring is the Book of Mormon, America's most unique and prolific scriptural production. In the middle of this epic bout Grant Hardy calls a timeout with his new book Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide. He attempts the double-task of convincing non-Mormons that the Book of Mormon is worth the effort of serious analysis while convincing Mormons that searching their sacred book can yield more than didactic homilies or proofs of ancient authenticity. Granting the importance of the main event, he offers a different venue altogether.

By reading closely, Hardy guides readers through novel readings not found in other studies of the Book of Mormon. For instance, he observes that "Alma or Mormon (or Joseph Smith) has structured the first two-thirds of the book of Alma according to a series of parallels" (304). Alma 4-16 includes three sermons delivered to three different cities. Alma 36-42 includes Alma's three charges to three different sons (Alma 36-42). The sermons and charges overlap in theme, respective length, order, and source (primary documents are utilized in each case). This city/son parallel is even more interesting considering Alma preached in five cities but only three accounts are included in the narrative. Altogether, this indicates remarkable coincidence or deliberate construction: Zarahemla/Helaman (morally ambiguous), Gideon/Shiblon (clearly righteous, shortest), Ammonihah/Corianton (clearly wicked, longest).

Impressively, Hardy's book is so full of detailed analysis that this particular discovery in Alma is actually relegated to a footnote! At times Hardy moves quickly through bits of the Book of Mormon. His tracing of its complexity may lose outsiders who aren't as familiar with Lehi's vision of the tree, or the Nephite monetary system, or other (relatively incidental) details. Similarly, some Latter-day Saints may feel slightly disoriented with occasional technical jargon. These difficulties are explained by Hardy's desire to reach a broad audience. The book invites critics to attempt a "willing suspension of disbelief" so they might see more fruitful readings despite doubts of authorship. Latter-day Saints, he adds, may need a "willing suspension of belief, that is, to think of the Book of Mormon as a work of literature, with an emphasis on its creativity and artifice" as opposed to proofs of ancient origin or teachings for our times (28).

This book makes a strong case that when examined closely, the Book of Mormon "exhibits a literary exuberance that frustrates quick judgments and reductive analysis" (267). By shifting "attention away from Joseph Smith and back to the Book of Mormon itself, a common discourse becomes possible" through literary analysis (xvi). Readers who try to play by Hardy's rules will be richly rewarded. It will change the way you read the Book of Mormon forever. A Reader's Guide is a knockout punch in ink and paper; I can't recommend it enough.

Nothing like a good pugilistic metaphor to punch its way to a knockout book review! I'm down for the count, and ready to take home the purse! Kudos Dr. Hardy and Mr. Hodges!

V/R
Dr. CamNC4Me

[_I have a question]

Dr. Hardy declared publicly that belief in a historical Book of Mormon is unnecessary for entry into the Celestial Kingdom.

Its still an incredible statement, given who made it and where.

[_Dr. Shades]

Its still an incredible statement, given who made it and where.

Indeed. And I've said it before: Poor David Bokovoy's only sin was saying the same thing seven years too early.

[_Kishkumen]

Its still an incredible statement, given who made it and where.

Indeed. And I've said it before: Poor David Bokovoy's only sin was saying the same thing seven years too early.

David was saying the same kind of stuff while he was intending to work at BYU. Grant Hardy is not working at a Church school. I think that makes a huge difference. In any case, David is still a member of the LDS Church. No one has excommunicated him. He was pushed into resigning from CES as much by his own choices as anything else. I applaud David for really putting his money where his mouth is. Few people have the fortitude to do what he has done. It has cost him. On the other hand, the outcome was pretty predictable. And I don't see how Grant Hardy's candor on this costs him much of anything.

[_kairos]

Congrats to Dr Hardy!

If it be possible, this community overseen by Dr Shades should in all do haste attempt to obtain one of the Kinderhook plates, engrave it with an appropriate congratulatory remark and send it in the dark of night in an undescript brown envelope to Dr Hardy. This gesture will seal the deal that the Sampson Avard Scepter award is premier in the Mormon-Anti-Mormon sphere of the internet.

So get movin, those plates should be available -if not we can fabricate a likeness!

And I hope Dr Hardy does not believe the K plates are authentic!

k

[_Hagoth]

I would like to optimistically predict that next year's award will go to someone who will observe that's once the keystone may be assumed nonliteral so can the entire structure.