Time has not vindicated Hugh Nibley
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 7:23 am
Interpreter has been publishing some of Hugh's audio tapes from the 1950s. They are an interesting insight into naïve Mormon apologetics before the era of the Tanners. Hugh and his listeners in the 1950s are completely unaware of the 1832 account of the First Vision, since it is still at this time being deliberately hidden by church leaders. Thus, time has not been kind to Hugh's arguments. In this audio recording, he lays out what he believes separates a false prophet, Muhammad, from a true prophet, Joseph Smith.
1) Hugh says Muhammad was full of self doubt, whereas Joseph was always completely confident. Well lo and behold, the 1832 first vision account revolves entirely around Joseph's inner turmoil. "My mind became exceedingly distressed, for I became convicted of my sins"
2) Hugh says Muhammad didn't have any miraculous translation ability, whereas Smith "read and translated the book, which he carried around with him from place to place. He actually copied out characters from the book and circulated them all around" This was the 1950s, when Mormon art was full of images of Joseph studying the golden plates, actively translating them. The rock in a hat, and the book of Abraham fiasco completely blows up Nibley's argument that Smith had any special gift/power of translation.
3) Hugh says that Joseph's reports are "clear, specific, and precise." Again, this was before even Hugh himself knew of the existence of the earliest account of the First Vision. The one where Smith doesn't see two personages. Because Smith hadn't come up with the idea of God and Jesus being two separate beings yet.
https://interpreterfoundation.org/nible ... preachers/
I'm a bit surprised that Interpreter is republishing these, because time has definitely not been kind to Hugh's apologetic arguments. I am definitely grateful to get a window into how confident he was, when his church was still hiding so many critical facts.
1) Hugh says Muhammad was full of self doubt, whereas Joseph was always completely confident. Well lo and behold, the 1832 first vision account revolves entirely around Joseph's inner turmoil. "My mind became exceedingly distressed, for I became convicted of my sins"
2) Hugh says Muhammad didn't have any miraculous translation ability, whereas Smith "read and translated the book, which he carried around with him from place to place. He actually copied out characters from the book and circulated them all around" This was the 1950s, when Mormon art was full of images of Joseph studying the golden plates, actively translating them. The rock in a hat, and the book of Abraham fiasco completely blows up Nibley's argument that Smith had any special gift/power of translation.
3) Hugh says that Joseph's reports are "clear, specific, and precise." Again, this was before even Hugh himself knew of the existence of the earliest account of the First Vision. The one where Smith doesn't see two personages. Because Smith hadn't come up with the idea of God and Jesus being two separate beings yet.
https://interpreterfoundation.org/nible ... preachers/
I'm a bit surprised that Interpreter is republishing these, because time has definitely not been kind to Hugh's apologetic arguments. I am definitely grateful to get a window into how confident he was, when his church was still hiding so many critical facts.