Nibley: Footnote faker or not?

[_aussieguy55]

http://scholarsarchive.BYU.edu/cgi/view ... ontext=etd

interesting masters thesis on Nibley. One section deals with his footnote problems

[_Kishkumen]

A discussion of Nibley is incomplete until smart people try to prove that they're smarter than each other.

The Nibley Effect.

"Look! The emperor is naked!"

I take it you are not in academia and that is why you mistake academic rivalry and disagreement for this made-up phenomenon you call "The Nibley Effect."

[_Kishkumen]

Do you disagree with my statement that, "One can argue about how fast Old Testament Judaism progressed to henotheism and monotheism. But it's clear that was the overall trend." Do you think that by circa 400 BC, Judaism was basically monotheistic. If not, what was it?

Do you disagree with my statement that, "Mormonism reverses that and claims that polytheism was the orthodox position." What do you think about Joseph Smith's June 16, 1844 sermon. It appears to me to be teaching polytheism. Since Mormonism teaches that it is the restoration of pre-apostate Christianity, pre-apostate Christianity must have been polytheistic. Or do you think that the June, 1844 sermon does not reflect the official LDS teaching.

What is Old Testament Judaism? Who are the Old Testament Jews? How are Mormons "polytheists"? Does everyone agree that they are (including the Mormons)? I can imagine a number of things to take issue with here. Feel free to elaborate when you have finished enjoying Harvard.

[_Kishkumen]

Then in a discussion about Nibley...why did you choose to inject my faith? Think about it/

Because, guess what, I don't have to agree with your faith any more than I agree with Nibley's! Of course, I don't really know the details of your faith. But I do know that as an LDS missionary I often encountered Protestants of different stripes who thought Mormonism was bizarre and therefore Satanic or some such. Of course, Protestant history is filled with examples of the same sort of bizarreness, so it is funny to see Protestants going ape over Mormon idiosyncrasies.

[_Kishkumen]

http://scholarsarchive.BYU.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5547&context=etd

interesting masters thesis on Nibley. One section deals with his footnote problems

Thanks for sharing this, aussie! I was unaware of this thesis and look forward to reading it when I have the time. I perused the section about footnotes, and it definitely well reflects what I heard from his research assistants.

Funnier and more rewarding for me, however, was the bit about him constantly forgetting the location of his car. It reminds me of an unpleasant interaction I had with Nibley. One warm spring afternoon I saw Nibley wandering around the parking lot behind the old Joseph Knight Building. I asked him what was going on, and he said, "I am looking for my car." Thinking that I would help him out by looking with him, I asked, "What does your car look like?" And he angrily shot back at me, "I know what my car looks like." Then he turned away from me and kept up the search. That was the only unpleasant interaction I had with him.

[_Kishkumen]

Meanwhile, the Mormon intellectual faces a great test of humility to remain in an organization led by anti-intellectuals. If he is not to lose the name of action, he must, like Hamlet, resolve his dilemma. If to remain within the Church means paralysis of will and denial of the deepest urgings of his thought, he must make a break for the open sea. He leaves one haven, as every institution is a haven. There waits, perhaps, the larger harbor of a more inclusive humanity."

http://www.humanistsofutah.org/2002/Pro ... 05-02.html

Nibley seemed to have found an uneasy accommodation that was reached by regularly obeying the leaders and meeting intellectual challenges on the LDS Church's behalf. One can get away with a fair amount of intellectual independence, so long as one toes the line when the leaders put their feet down. The same is true today. There are plenty of LDS scholars who have questions and disagreements, but they generally keep them to themselves, or keep them reasonably private, ever signaling to the priesthood hierarchy that they can be counted on to stand up for the Kingdom and do what they are told.

Although my decisions were for the most part personal ones that had little impact beyond me, the larger harbor of the more inclusive humanity was always in my view.

[_Maksutov]

Then in a discussion about Nibley...why did you choose to inject my faith? Think about it/

Because, guess what, I don't have to agree with your faith any more than I agree with Nibley's! Of course, I don't really know the details of your faith. But I do know that as an LDS missionary I often encountered Protestants of different stripes who thought Mormonism was bizarre and therefore Satanic or some such. Of course, Protestant history is filled with examples of the same sort of bizarreness, so it is funny to see Protestants going ape over Mormon idiosyncrasies.

What I have seen is that the typical conservative Protestant dodge is to dismiss all 'unusual' expressions of Protestantism as "cults of Christianity". Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Dallas is a great example. He also gets into defining the RCC as a "Babylonian mystery religion". What a guy.

[_Kishkumen]

What I have seen is that the typical conservative Protestant dodge is to dismiss all 'unusual' expressions of Protestantism as "cults of Christianity". Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Dallas is a great example. He also gets into defining the RCC as a "Babylonian mystery religion". What a guy.

Yes, cult, occult, Satanic, strange, pagan--these are all essentially the same thing, eh?

[_Maksutov]

What I have seen is that the typical conservative Protestant dodge is to dismiss all 'unusual' expressions of Protestantism as "cults of Christianity". Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Dallas is a great example. He also gets into defining the RCC as a "Babylonian mystery religion". What a guy.

Yes, cult, occult, Satanic, strange, pagan--these are all essentially the same thing, eh?

All you have to do is attend a "Worldview Weekend" conference and it will all be made clear to you.

[_Doctor Steuss]

What is Old Testament Judaism? Who are the Old Testament Jews? How are Mormons "polytheists"? Does everyone agree that they are (including the Mormons)? I can imagine a number of things to take issue with here. Feel free to elaborate when you have finished enjoying Harvard.

If I may add a question: Would these Old Testament Jews recognize the modern concept of orthodoxy?