DesNews: Maxwell Institute Will Still Do Apologetics

[_Kishkumen]

The problem was not with Dan's firing. The problem is how it was done: by email when he was out of the country. For some strange reason this is being overlooked by people here. It is not a good way for a church related organization to do its internal business. People deserve more respect than to be fired by email when out of the country.

And that was the point.

And how long is that grudge going to be nursed? No one here has overlooked the fact that he was reassigned while he was abroad and responded by resigning as a director. Your hyperbole about firing is a useful misrepresentation, if your goal is to stoke the grudge and make Bradford look as bad as possible. And that seems to be the goal of the classic-FARMS crew.

Let it go.

[_Yoda]

From the link:

Daniel C. Peterson, former editor of "Mormon Studies" for the Neal A. Maxwell Institute at BYU, took advantage of the spotlight afforded to him as the concluding speaker during Friday's final session of the 2012 Conference of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) to announce the formation of a new resource for those interested in scholarly perspectives on the scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

"Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture (http://www.mormoninterpreter.com) is intended as a "nonprofit, independent, peer-reviewed educational journal" focused on LDS scriptures, Peterson said.

"We will exist primarily online," said Peterson


I predicted that one on MDD. It is effective and cheap and can rely on donations. Good work, Dan.

Has anyone clicked on the link? It looks like David Bokyvoy has the first featured paper. If David is on board, maybe this new venture won't be as strident as we fear?

[_Chap]

"We will exist primarily online," said Peterson

The further from the dull restrictions of the actually existing material world they move, the more successful the efforts of mopologists will be.

(I'm thinking 'The Matrix' here.)

[_Yoda]

"We will exist primarily online," said Peterson

The further from the dull restrictions of the actually existing material world they move, the more successful the efforts of mopologists will be.

(I'm thinking 'The Matrix' here.)

Frankly, since BYU turned David Bokyvoy down, if this venture gives him an opportunity to show his chops, I'm all for it. Maybe we need to actually see what happens with this before we down it.

[_Chap]

Well, this is a place for casual comment on passing events, not for carefully considered review articles written well after everything has taken place.

And somehow I don't feel, given the likely candidates, that David Bokovoy is likely to be wholly representative of the general run of contributors to a scripture-related journal edited by DCP after his auto-ejection from the MI. We shall see.

[_Kishkumen]

Has anyone clicked on the link? It looks like David Bokyvoy has the first featured paper. If David is on board, maybe this new venture won't be as strident as we fear?

Yes, I have noted as much, and discussed my hopes, but it should also be noted that Peterson has mentioned that reviews will be published there, which suggests to me that there may be slams like the Compton piece or the scuttled Dehlin "review." We will just have to see.

[_harmony]

[

"We will exist primarily online," said Peterson

Wait a minute. According to Dan, anything online doesn't really exist. As in... the posters here aren't real people, with real feelings, with real thoughts and opinions. And he can't be friends with unreal people. So does that mean this new enterprise won't be real?

And does publishing something online count as publishing in the academic world?

[_sock puppet]

So they are lashing out, accusing others, Gerald Bradford in particular. It is, quite simply, an ugly mess. The more they have spit out into the internetz, the more Bradford's decision looks justified if not late in coming.

+1

With decades of the ad hom attacks against Church critics as their modus operandi, it seems unlikely that these newly disenfranchised apologists, now the Interpreters, will suddenly turn over a new leaf and keep their retorts to the substance of the criticisms that they will address. In the aftermath of DCP's sacking, the Interpreters have continued their ad hom attack style, having turned their sights on Bradford.

Bokovoy as the lead off author at Interpreter is a good sign. But is it the shape of things to come, or simply a Trojan horse, using Bokovoy as the 'gift' to seduce a new following for the Interpreter, and the Interpreters will then pile out, wielding their acerbic pens?

Time will tell. I don't think the fact that skepticism here has been expressed is anyone prejudging or rendering a final judgment of this new venture. But given the track records of the Interpreters, I think that skepticism is both healthy and well placed.

[_Doctor Scratch]

So they are lashing out, accusing others, Gerald Bradford in particular. It is, quite simply, an ugly mess. The more they have spit out into the internetz, the more Bradford's decision looks justified if not late in coming.

+1

With decades of the ad hom attacks against Church critics as their modus operandi, it seems unlikely that these newly disenfranchised apologists, now the Interpreters, will suddenly turn over a new leaf and keep their retorts to the substance of the criticisms that they will address. In the aftermath of DCP's sacking, the Interpreters have continued their ad hom attack style, having turned their sights on Bradford.

Bokovoy as the lead off author at Interpreter is a good sign. But is it the shape of things to come, or simply a Trojan horse, using Bokovoy as the 'gift' to seduce a new following for the Interpreter, and the Interpreters will then pile out, wielding their acerbic pens?

Time will tell. I don't think the fact that skepticism here has been expressed is anyone prejudging or rendering a final judgment of this new venture. But given the track records of the Interpreters, I think that skepticism is both healthy and well placed.

I think that DCP's remarks in his FAIR talk were entirely sincere, if somewhat evasive/avoidant of certain problems. But the inclusion of the Bokovoy piece doesn't really mean anything other than the fact that they are willing to publish stuff written by Bokovoy--and they were willing to do that back in the day of the Review. But I mention DCP's talk because I think Bokovoy's article falls in line with "Problem No. 1" that both DCP and Hamblin identified--i.e., that there is little room for "faithful scholarship" in the academy, and perhaps even less so for "faithful Mormon scholarship." That is: the stuff can't be outright testimony-bearing, or treat the Nephites as if they were real, genuinely historical people.

Aristotle Smith has said some really insightful things about the problems that face thoughtful, academically-minded LDS who want to publish. For the longest time, as AS pointed out, FARMS was pretty much the only game in town, and even now, there just aren't that many venues that will publish "faithful" textual analysis and interpretation of the Book of Mormon. So this is why Bokovoy's essay is here--because it fits well with some of the interests of the Editorial Board.

But, unless the "classic-FARMS" guys can rein in their tendencies, it's not going to matter, because their antics will drag the whole entire thing down.

[_MsJack]

Has anyone clicked on the link? It looks like David Bokyvoy has the first featured paper. If David is on board, maybe this new venture won't be as strident as we fear?

I'm not so optimistic. I love me some David Bokovoy, but he was already involved with the old Maxwell Institute publications in that he was willing to publish there. Yet those publications still had the problems with tone and name-calling that they did.

I'll forego judgment on the new Interpreter until they release their first volume. But for Bokovoy to release a paper with them doesn't really reassure me that this won't just be The FARMS Review v. 2.0.