From My Informant: Stormy Weather Ahead for Brant Gardner?

[_harmony]

I might agree with you if we were talking about actual scholars here, but we're not. We're talking about Mopologists.

I don't see what that has to do with anything. According to you, Brant is of the same group.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I doubt there is any concerted effort to target Brant's work. If David Bokovoy is writing an review, it is to address his own intellectual issues with the work. His view of the Book of Mormon is quite different from Brant's. Maybe there are those who feel protective of chiasmus, I don't know. That is a better bet than the idea that David is participating in a deliberate Brant Gardner take-down of some kind. In any case, it will be interesting to see what the reviews are like.

Oh, don't get me wrong: my assumption is that, if he is writing a review, David B. would be collegial and professional--at least, the draft he handed in would be. But this wouldn't do anything to prevent a potential editorial heavy hand from coming in and making the review more of an attack piece--sort of like what seems to have happened with Midgley's tinkering with LoaP's essay. So I guess what I'm saying is that, if true, David would be an unwilling participant in the attacks.

[_Doctor Scratch]

There were a couple of other things that I was told this weekend, one of which I suppose I will add into this thread. It seems relevant in light of some of the DCP material that has surfaced in recent days. Basically, I was told that Will Schryver still has a contingent of very loyal supporters at the Maxwell Institute: people who don't care a lick about the various things he's said online. Additionally, there are apparently some "very important people" in SLC who are supportive of Will's project. The rumor is that he is still hard at work on his big Book of Abraham study, and that it will indeed eventually see publication and enthusiastic support from the MI.

[_harmony]

The rumor is that he is still hard at work on his big Book of Abraham study, and that it will indeed eventually see publication and enthusiastic support from the MI.

Oh, I can only HOPE so.

[_Shulem]

There were a couple of other things that I was told this weekend, one of which I suppose I will add into this thread. It seems relevant in light of some of the DCP material that has surfaced in recent days. Basically, I was told that Will Schryver still has a contingent of very loyal supporters at the Maxwell Institute: people who don't care a lick about the various things he's said online. Additionally, there are apparently some "very important people" in SLC who are supportive of Will's project. The rumor is that he is still hard at work on his big Book of Abraham study, and that it will indeed eventually see publication and enthusiastic support from the MI.

Let them adopt William's garbage. The news media will roast Mormonism over open flames. Facsimile No. 3 is like a page ripped out of a pornagraphic magazine and makes the church looks really stupid. Bring the LDS scholarly bastards on. World (REAL) scholars will come in and spray Mormon scholars like insects crawling over a dead animal.

They can take their Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 and their Book of Mormon and shove it up Mitt's hole.

Paul O

[_ldsfaqs]

You guys are so funny....

A new book on Mormon Studies, OF COURSE it's going to be reviewed, and OF COURSE there might be a different opinion on something offered or criticism.

But I predict that overall the review will be very positive, as they usually are with pro-LDS works.
Brant is after all one of the main apologists/intellectuals of LDS scholarship. He speaks what every single year at FAIR?

Anyway, contrary to popular belief, LDS apologists and scholars are not "lockstep" with one another on every single issue and view. Scholarship and intellectual inquiry is after all just that. There can be some differences of opinion, yet we all be on the same side. About whatever concerning Meso-America or otherwise, such has nothing to do with "doctrine" of the LDS Church and it's truth claims.

I disagree with Brant's views concerning Quetzalcoatl, that that "thing" has nothing to do with, or is related in any way to Christ's coming to the America's. I think various elements do relate, and while they are not the same, etc., to me it's clear the legends have mixed. But, from what I know, I pretty much agree with likely most anything else I've known from Brant.

What's knew and so what......?

[_Doctor Scratch]

What do you think of Rodney Meldrum, ldsfaqs? He seems like he could be a role model for you.

[_ldsfaqs]

What do you think of Rodney Meldrum, ldsfaqs? He seems like he could be a role model for you.

Not even..... He gets EVERYTHING wrong, just like you guys intellectually though differently obviously.

[_Doctor Scratch]

What do you think of Rodney Meldrum, ldsfaqs? He seems like he could be a role model for you.

Not even..... He gets EVERYTHING wrong, just like you guys intellectually though differently obviously.

Rodney Meldrum is an earnest, believing Latter-day Saint. He's been admirably enterprising in terms of supporting his own views. You ought to try and befriend him--I bet he would be willing to help you out. I'm sure he would be a lot more decent to you than a lot of the FAIR/FARMS crowd.

[_Enuma Elish]

If they can encourage Bokovoy to viciously attack Gardner, it will not only undercut the Vanguard's power, but it will push Bokovoy ever so slightly closer to the Old Guard's way of doing things (i.e., ad hominem attack, mockery, smear campaigns, and so on).

Hello Friends,

I received a question regarding this thread via Facebook. I have not written a critique, and if I did, I certainly would never say a negative word about Brant Gardner.

Though once interested in such matters, I no longer engage in apologetics.

Warm regards,

--DB