More on the Financing of Mopologetics

[Guest]

3. What percentage of the Maxwell Institute's fundraising dollar goes to apologetics?

100%

Wildly false.

It could only possibly be true if projects like the Dead Sea Scrolls electronic database, the Book of Mormon Critical Text Project, the Herculaneum digitization project, the Islamic Translation Series, the BYU-Vatican Syriac database, the Medical Works of Moses Maimonides, the Library of the Christian East, the Petra digitization project, Eastern Christian Texts, the Bonampak digitization project, and etc., were either (a) apologetic undertakings or (b) carried out at no cost.

Obviously, neither is the case. (Have a look at the Dead Sea Scrolls database or the Medical Works of Moses Maimonides or any of the others, and try telling anybody with a straight face that this is apologetic material.)

I expected considerably more seriousness from Gadianton. I don't expect much intellectual seriousness here, but I had hoped for a bit more from him.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Thus, though DCP may be a Professor of Arab Studies, it seems that, within the context of ISPART and its various branches, his Arab work is expected to support "the restored Gospel."

Read through Medical Aphorisms 1 or The Philosophy of Illumination or The Decisive Treatise or Averrroës's Middle Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima and then elucidate how these works serve an apologetic function. Good grief. All of the METI books are available from the University of Chicago Press. This ignorant and jaundiced speculation just makes you look foolish.

[_Gadianton]

Dr. Peterson, I'm sorry that I disappointed you. But I am serious. If you read my later comments you will see in what way I meant them to be taken. I have developed what I call the three-tier model of apologetics. So yes, I consider the Dead Sea Scroll archival project to be a part of an apologetic effort. From Trevor's citation:

In 2006, the BYU Board of Trustees renamed ISPART the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. "By renaming ISPART, BYU honors the memory and life's work of Elder Maxwell," said BYU President Cecil O. Samuelson. "This change firmly sets the future direction of the institute, which is to promote profound scholarship supporting the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ—something Elder Maxwell cared about deeply."

If the above statement is true, then what percentage of funds are being wasted by the institute on projects not in line with its stated aim, to "promote profound scholarship supporting the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ?"

[_Gadianton]

For those interested in the purpose of the Dead Sea Scroll project, you can go here and read all about the Book of Mormon:

http://farms.BYU.edu/dss/interest.html

[_Mister Scratch]

Thus, though DCP may be a Professor of Arab Studies, it seems that, within the context of ISPART and its various branches, his Arab work is expected to support "the restored Gospel."

Read through Medical Aphorisms 1 or The Philosophy of Illumination or The Decisive Treatise or Averrroës's Middle Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima and then elucidate how these works serve an apologetic function. Good grief. All of the METI books are available from the University of Chicago Press. This ignorant and jaundiced speculation just makes you look foolish.

Then why the ISPART mission statement? Certainly, I'll admit right out front: I have no idea what those texts might have to do with LDS apologetics, but, hey, this wouldn't be the first time that "bullseyes" have been found in extraordinarily strange places. Do you think it is fair to say---given the mission statement---that there is an expectation or hope that proof of the LDS Church will be found in these various texts and subjects? For example, do folks within ISPART hope that one day some ancient Arab text or artifact will turn up that helps to validate the Book of Mormon?

by the way: I'm still waiting for you to address the reasons why the FP revised their statement on the Hill Cumorah. Since, you know, this demonstrates a pretty significant tie between apologetics and the Brethren.....

[_Daniel Peterson]

Take a careful look at the Dead Sea Scrolls Electronic Library. Find something apologetic in it. Then report.

It can be purchased here:

http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=18&pid=25695

[_Mister Scratch]

Take a careful look at the Dead Sea Scrolls Electronic Library. Find something apologetic in it. Then report.

It can be purchased here:

http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=18&pid=25695

This is a red herring. Obviously, there *won't* be anything obviously LDS in some of these materials. But, as we all know, a big part of apologetics involves finding evidence where none seems to exist. For example, Lamanite DNA. Anyways, the link Gad provided demonstrates pretty clearly what's at work here: The Brethren have sanctioned the Maxwell Institute and have essentially ordered it to comb through any materials which can help validate and "prove" the Church. What is "apologetic" in the scrolls? Well, nothing, so far as I know. But as the website states, the scrolls are nonetheless of great interest to LDS, since they show that new evidence is bound to turn up at any time:

Although the Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain the lost records the Latter-day Saints await, they are of great interest to LDS scholars and others. The scrolls provide not only new information about the transmission of the Old Testament but also greater evidence for the variety of beliefs and practices within Judaism shortly before and after the time of Jesus Christ.

More generally, the Latter-day Saints view the scrolls' discovery as part of a wider pattern of increasing knowledge about the Bible lands and their people that the Lord is making available for study in this day.

The Brethren want BYU scholars to be on top of this stuff, hence the ISPART mission statement. Obviously, most of the stuff is not going to have anything whatsoever to do with Mormonism. But, by golly, that's not going to stop some people from combing through it anyhow.

[_Daniel Peterson]

The definition of apologetics in Scratchworld is so broad, now, that breathing can count as apologetics, since someone might use the oxygen inhaled by means of breathing in order to power muscles that will type an apologetic sentence on a keyboard.

Here's another hot Mopologetic title:

http://www.amazon.com/Middle-Commentary ... 0842524738

[_harmony]

The Brethren want BYU scholars to be on top of this stuff, hence the ISPART mission statement. Obviously, most of the stuff is not going to have anything whatsoever to do with Mormonism. But, by golly, that's not going to stop some people from combing through it anyhow.

'Scuse me, but I've seen the Dead Sea Scrolls (at least the ones that were on exhibit in San Diego last winter) and they are absolutely spectacular. I see no reason for a church based on Christianity to neglect their study, given the opportunity. And I saw nothing about them that would be in any way construed to be connected to Mormonism.

Is it so hard to believe that the church would finance something for the good of humanity? To do something that is completely altruistic?

[_Mister Scratch]

The definition of apologetics in Scratchworld is so broad, now, that breathing can count as apologetics, since someone might use the oxygen inhaled by means of breathing in order to power muscles that will type an apologetic sentence on a keyboard.

Here's another hot Mopologetic title:

http://www.amazon.com/Middle-Commentary ... 0842524738

Sure, try to exaggerate this very significant criticism out of existence. It still does nothing to explain why President Samuelson said what he said, nor does it do much to pooh-pooh away the link Gadianton provided. Besides, I already stated that I don't believe many of those texts are apologetic in nature. Rather, the raison d'etre of The Maxwell Institute, as per Pres. Samuelson, is to figure out how they might be.

So, let me ask you again: Are there high hopes amongst the Brethren that you guys will discover a "NAHOM", or something of that nature, in one of these texts? Y/N?