A "Duh!" Moment for Bill Hamblin

[_Enuma Elish]

This is a great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer, right?

Indeed, "Hamblin's book [Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History (London: Routledge, 2006] is a goldmine of information-- both textual and archaeological-- on ancient Near Eastern warfare before the Late Bronze Age." Professor Robert Drews, Vanderbilt University

[_Canucklehead]

After my experience in Church last Sunday, I suspect that many of these arguments are not aimed at satisfying critics, but to lead the faithful to feeling satisfied that "Dan Perterson and his friends" have provided proof against the critics's arguments. To that end, the quality of the argument does not matter.

What experience? If you posted it elsewhere on the board, I must have missed it.

[_dartagnan]

Indeed, "Hamblin's book [Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History (London: Routledge, 2006] is a goldmine of information-- both textual and archaeological-- on ancient Near Eastern warfare before the Late Bronze Age." Professor Robert Drews, Vanderbilt University

You're learning well David. Dan and Bill's investment in you is certainly paying off. ;)

When one's arguments are put to the test, just remind everyone how smart they appear to be for publishing something in academia.

I don't know. After Bill Hamblin acted like a child with me, accused me of lying, and then ran away at the behest of Dan, after I proved I was not lying, I kinda lost respect for him. It must have been an embarrassing moment for him when I quoted from him, word for word, from his own interview, comments that he didn't even realize he said. I'm still waiting for his apology.

Doubt I'll get it.

[_guy sajer]

This is a great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer, right?

Indeed, "Hamblin's book [Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History (London: Routledge, 2006] is a goldmine of information-- both textual and archaeological-- on ancient Near Eastern warfare before the Late Bronze Age." Professor Robert Drews, Vanderbilt University

I think that we can all agree that one might be very highly accomplished in certain areas, be otherwise extremely intelligent, be an acknowledged expert in certain areas, and still at times engage in very unsound thinking.

I don't expect anyone to take my word because I've published a lot. (If that sort of thing is the standard, then I should be the indisputed resident expert on this board, as I suspect that no one here has published as much as I have--though I don't know that for certain.) If I make unsound arguments, they are still unsound, regardless of what my other bonafides are.

[_Enuma Elish]

Hello Kevin,

You're learning well David. Dan and Bill's investment in you is certainly paying off. ;)

Sadly, I don't think so. Given the preposterous sum they've invested, I'm proving to be a poor venture indeed.

Hello Guy Sajer,

This is a great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer, right?

Indeed, "Hamblin's book [Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History (London: Routledge, 2006] is a goldmine of information-- both textual and archaeological-- on ancient Near Eastern warfare before the Late Bronze Age." Professor Robert Drews, Vanderbilt University

I think that we can all agree that one might be very highly accomplished in certain areas, be otherwise extremely intelligent, be an acknowledged expert in certain areas, and still at times engage in very unsound thinking.

I don't expect anyone to take my word because I've published a lot. (If that sort of thing is the standard, then I should be the indisputed resident expert on this board, as I suspect that no one here has published as much as I have--though I don't know that for certain.) If I make unsound arguments, they are still unsound, regardless of what my other bonafides are.

I certainly agree. Simply because a person is brilliant doesn’t mean that he or she will never make a mistake. In response to the question raised by Gadianton, I simply feel that it’s worth noting one of the many reasons that Bill Hamblin is in fact a “great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer.”

Without giving too much away, could you tell us what your field is?

Best.

[_guy sajer]

Hello Kevin,

You're learning well David. Dan and Bill's investment in you is certainly paying off. ;)

Sadly, I don't think so. Given the preposterous sum they've invested, I'm proving to be a poor venture indeed.

Hello Guy Sajer,

This is a great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer, right?

Indeed, "Hamblin's book [Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History (London: Routledge, 2006] is a goldmine of information-- both textual and archaeological-- on ancient Near Eastern warfare before the Late Bronze Age." Professor Robert Drews, Vanderbilt University

I think that we can all agree that one might be very highly accomplished in certain areas, be otherwise extremely intelligent, be an acknowledged expert in certain areas, and still at times engage in very unsound thinking.

I don't expect anyone to take my word because I've published a lot. (If that sort of thing is the standard, then I should be the indisputed resident expert on this board, as I suspect that no one here has published as much as I have--though I don't know that for certain.) If I make unsound arguments, they are still unsound, regardless of what my other bonafides are.

I certainly agree. Simply because a person is brilliant doesn’t mean that he or she will never make a mistake. In response to the question raised by Gadianton, I simply feel that it’s worth noting one of the many reasons that Bill Hamblin is in fact a “great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer.”

Without giving too much away, could you tell us what your field is?

Best.

Without knowing anything else about someone, the fact they are welcome to "do a stint at Oxford" is an important piece of information. I'd kill to do a stint at Oxford.

I was faculty at Marriott School at BYU from 1991-1994 (or was it until '95--I honestly can't recall off hand in which year I resigned). I resigned due to loss of belief (I couldn't fake it anymore) and started my own development consulting firm.

I have long been on record that I consider BYU a fine university with many, many extremely intelligent faculty and students. I do not believe, however, that intellectual freedom exists there, I am not a fan of its intense focus on religious indoctrination, I believe that the ecclesiastical endorsement is a gross invasion of privacy, etc. Otherwise, I had a great run there, enjoyed my time immensely, on balance; it was just time for both us us to move on.

I'm also on record that the many of the FARMSistas are good to high level scholars in their academic fields. I just think that their apologetic work is silly, poorly argued, violates common sense and, often, decency, and iis ntellectually dishonest.

[_Chap]

Hello Kevin,

You're learning well David. Dan and Bill's investment in you is certainly paying off. ;)

Sadly, I don't think so. Given the preposterous sum they've invested, I'm proving to be a poor venture indeed.

Hello Guy Sajer,

This is a great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer, right?

Indeed, "Hamblin's book [Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC Holy Warriors at the Dawn of History (London: Routledge, 2006] is a goldmine of information-- both textual and archaeological-- on ancient Near Eastern warfare before the Late Bronze Age." Professor Robert Drews, Vanderbilt University

I think that we can all agree that one might be very highly accomplished in certain areas, be otherwise extremely intelligent, be an acknowledged expert in certain areas, and still at times engage in very unsound thinking.

I don't expect anyone to take my word because I've published a lot. (If that sort of thing is the standard, then I should be the indisputed resident expert on this board, as I suspect that no one here has published as much as I have--though I don't know that for certain.) If I make unsound arguments, they are still unsound, regardless of what my other bonafides are.

I certainly agree. Simply because a person is brilliant doesn’t mean that he or she will never make a mistake. In response to the question raised by Gadianton, I simply feel that it’s worth noting one of the many reasons that Bill Hamblin is in fact a “great professor who will be doing a stint at Oxford this summer.”

Without giving too much away, could you tell us what your field is?

Best.

Can we all join in?

I am a senior academic with a chair at a University in the 'top ten' of quite a few listings. I have a PhD in a difficult ancient language, and use it to discuss a number of technical issues that require other disciplines that I will not specify. (I don't want to identify myself further, because my academic colleagues would look down their noses at me for my occasional interest in matters LDS).

Now I don't know much about Hebrew compared to my own 'speshul' language. BUT .... I wouldn't need even a phrase-book knowledge of French in order to see that the OP's point, especially as added to by later posters, is, if not an instant killer, at least a slow-acting poison pellet self administered by Prof. Hamblin:

1. Once you start admitting that bits of the Book of Mormon are legendary, or even mythical, you not only are moving far, far away from any understanding of what the text means to ordinary Mormons, but making a radically new move in LDS apologetics that may eventually lead to unravelling the whole structure that underpin's F&T Sunday testimonies that "I know the Book of Mormon is true."

2. The assertion that the alleged Nephites created a legend of a 'heroic age' of metal use by even more alleged Jaredites is not one that can be sensibly maintained while also asserting (as do some LDS apologists, I believe - including Professor Hamblin?) that the Nephites had no metallurgy in their culture.

By the way, what's this stuff about 'He will be visiting OXFORD"? In my job I frequently receive approaches from scholars who want to visit my own not unexalted establishment. It's no great shakes. Anyone who thinks that a visit to a high-ranking school is some kind of life-time accolade to be mentioned in hushed tones of reverence needs to get a life. But one thing I can say: I hope that during his visit to the banks of the Isis Professor Hamblin sticks to talking about historically and archeologically verifiable facts about warfare in the ancient Near East, and says nothing to reveal that he believes America was colonised by ancient Jews who wrote texts in 'Reformed Egyptian' that were later translated by a man using a rock in a hat. Otherwise he may not be invited back, though the dons he meets will be much, much too polite to say what they think to his face. He should however be OK so long as he keeps shtum, because hardly anybody outside Utah has the faintest idea what Mormonism is about.

[_Enuma Elish]

I was faculty at Marriott School at BYU from 1991-1994 (or was it until '95--I honestly can't recall off hand in which year I resigned). I resigned due to loss of belief (I couldn't fake it anymore) and started my own development consulting firm.

Well, I certainly don't hold that against you. Sadly, one of my favorite people in the world was fired from my alma mater for unorthodox religious beliefs.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Sadly, even really smart people can be extraordinarily stupid-- and even dishonest-- when religion enters the equation. In no way do I think that certain top LDS scholars are "pseudoscholars", as they so often accuse anti-Mormons of thinking. But they certainly do seem to don their clown masks when they defend their faith.

[_guy sajer]

[By the way, what's this stuff about 'He will be visiting OXFORD"? In my job I frequently receive approaches from scholars who want to visit my own not unexalted establishment. It's no great shakes. Anyone who thinks that a visit to a high-ranking school is some kind of life-time accolade to be mentioned in hushed tones of reverence needs to get a life.

True enough, I suppose. I was indeed assuming that it meant something. Perhaps I am wrong in this case.

Still, I'd love to do a stint at Oxford.

That might be hard, however, given that I'm now out of academics and have become a slave to the billable hour.