It is currently Sat Feb 22, 2020 2:19 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:20 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 21487
Location: Koloburbia
WMLdeWette wrote:
Re-read the letter right after re-reading Morgan Davis's. That lens should provide reliable further insight.

We all have our strengths and weaknesses and critical reading is not one of my strengths. Besides, I was joking around by imagining possible interpretations of the letter. I allow myself to be both circumspect and extreme.

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:54 am 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9568
Kishkumen wrote:
Lemmie wrote:
I apologize for having such a suspicious mind, and I also apologize if this seems a little obvious to those in the know, but without revealing anything inappropriate, can someone confirm that the “author“ of the letter has personally and specifically verified that they did indeed write it?

I can attest to the authenticity of the letter.

Thank you, Kishkumen.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:59 am 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 20892
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
kairos wrote:
Man what a slog!!

Just to get to the bottom of this, I want to know if this is the first letter or second of a two parred or just and edited version of a first letter that was not really sent? Or is a copy of a fax and the original writer's name is cut off from a cut and paste job made to look like an attached original? If anyone has F. Michael WAtson's phone number in the Cayman's I would happy to call him; rumor is he and Carla are living nicely and still Communicate with a FP fax machine!

Well it's worth a try rather than trying to guess if it is DCP in the kitchen with a laptop!

Back to the slog!!

k

LOL! Well, there was the Morgan Davis letter of 2012. That is not this letter. This letter was written in early April of 2015.

_________________
“God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.” ~ Pat Robertson
“He says he has eyes to see things that are not . . . and that the angel of the Lord . . . has put him in possession of great wealth, gold, silver, precious stones.” ~ Jesse Smith


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:21 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9568
Doctor Scratch wrote:
I am going to go ahead and say that I believe the author of the letter is Kristian Heal, which, if true, definitely colors my reading of the “apology.” I have no doubt that he regrets the way things happened, but I’m also quite confident that he took/takes very serious issue with attack-minded Mopologetics. Thus, this would be a case of him trying to avoid taking any sides. Heal, along with Davis and Carl Griffin likely were the “3 Wisemen” that Midgley considers traitors.

This reminded me of something I read about FARMS and the Maxwell Institute that Hamblin wrote in a blog entry posted June 23, 2012. It seems even more relevant now. Hamblin discusses FARMS history, during which he comments on three people. It is interesting that he seems to refer to the Maxwell Institute as though it was and still is FARMS but now just has a name change; that was not my understanding, but I may not understand all the ins and outs here. Anyway, the three:

Quote:
We need to understand that Bradford, even as an employee and administrative executive for the Board, was never in favor of apologetics. He consistently opposed these activities, and tried to persuade the Board to move in different directions....

Likewise Morgan Davis, was originally hired as an editor in the Mideast Translation Series, not as a director to determine scholarly policy. He was hired to execute the academic policies of the Board, not to establish those policies. Davis also never liked apologetics.

Precisely the same is the case with Kristian Heal, who was hired to supervise a Syriac digitization project; he also always disliked apologetics.

So note what has happened. We have three employees, none of whom were actively researching or publishing FARMS scholars, and all of whom disliked apologetics. Each of these three were hired to execute the policies of the Board, not to create those policies. These three have now all become “directors” of the Maxwell Institute... are now responsible to create the scholarly policy and determine the future direction for the Institute, because the Board was dissolved by the University, and power was transferred to the employees.

It’s really breathtaking how the entire nature of the Institute was turned upside down and twisted in a different direction by this phenomena. Dan Peterson was the only scholar of the original FARMS Board who was left as a “director” of the Institute; with his dismissal classic-FARMS is gone. There is not a single voice left in the leadership of the Institute to represent the original goals of classic-FARMS. This is why Dan’s dismissal and marginalization is seen as such a massive betrayal. It is the removal of the last vestige of classic-FARMS....

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmatic ... lly-about/

[bolding and breaks added for ease of reading]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:22 pm 
God

Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 1822
For historical pertinence as helping to set the record on Mopologetics straight all of your thought pieces and memory recalls are of course important and I really do not mean to minimize the info being discussed here.

But there is it seems to me, some humor in all of this. I keep thinking of Mopologist Clue trying to guess the actual "villains" who did the Farmer's / Maxwell Institute in. Was it Scott Gordon in the conference room with an Iphone, or perhaps Spencer Fulhman in Samuelson's office with a letter from the Brethren or even Woody Midgely in a BYU restroom with his big boisterous mouth?

Perhaps we will never know and is that all bad?

k


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:38 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7610
Location: Cassius University
Kairos: I think that the answer is: “Morgan Davis, Jerry Bradford, Kristian Heal, and Carl Griffin, in the Maxwell Institue, with the assistance of Cecil Samuelson and Jeffrey Holland.”

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:28 am 
Nursery
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:50 pm
Posts: 15
Lemmie wrote:
It is interesting that he seems to refer to the Maxwell Institute as though it was and still is FARMS but now just has a name change; that was not my understanding, but I may not understand all the ins and outs here.


You are right, there is a major problem to the way that Hamblin, Midgley, and Peterson have always portrayed the importance of FARMS at the Maxwell Institute. The Maxwell Institute was at BYU prior to Hinckley's request/demand that FARMS become a part of it. The Maxwell Institute has always been a collection of different projects and organizations, and FARMS was only one of those. FARMS did not change its name to the Maxwell Institute and FARMS was never 100% the Maxwell Institute. Most of what FARMS itself was doing was brought in under the Willes Center at the Maxwell Institute, and METI was a project that Peterson was working on at BYU (so not technically FARMS). So, in other words, you are right.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:46 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:32 pm
Posts: 1414
Location: Parowan, Utah
WMLdeWette wrote:

You are right, there is a major problem to the way that Hamblin, Midgley, and Peterson have always portrayed the importance of FARMS at the Maxwell Institute. The Maxwell Institute was at BYU prior to Hinckley's request/demand that FARMS become a part of it. The Maxwell Institute has always been a collection of different projects and organizations, and FARMS was only one of those. FARMS did not change its name to the Maxwell Institute and FARMS was never 100% the Maxwell Institute. Most of what FARMS itself was doing was brought in under the Willes Center at the Maxwell Institute, and METI was a project that Peterson was working on at BYU (so not technically FARMS). So, in other words, you are right.


I'm not sure that is correct. My understanding (confirmed by Wikipedia, so take it for it's worth) is that the Maxwell Institute was not established until 2006, enveloping FARMS and ISPART (Institute for the Study and Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts). The latter was formed only in 2001 from CPART (the Center for the Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts), which was formed in 1997, but FARMS also joined BYU in 1997. As CPART involved most of the same people, the FARMS crew certainly had had an institutional foothold for at least as long as CPART and in any case long before the Maxwell Institute.

FARMS used to have an office on the southern slope of campus, in fact, marked, quite explicitly, with logo and all: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies. There was also Bayt al-Hikma, in that little house on the northern part of campus near the stadium, where some few were occasionally engaged on METI (Middle Eastern Texts Initiative), but there was no Maxwell Institute. As far as I know, METI was the oldest part of this (initiated in the early 1990s), but Daniel Peterson was its editor and had been instrumental in that project since the beginning, as well as in FARMS. METI was absorbed by ISPART when it was formed in the early 2000s, but METI was not an institute or anything of that sort; it was a project. Everything was absorbed by the Maxwell Institute on its formation in 2006, but FARMS certainly was the oldest institution at that time, and the Willes Book of Mormon center or whatever it's called wasn't formed until 2007, after the Maxwell Institute.

So my timeline is:

1992-ish: METI
1997: FARMS (with a preexistent life going back to 1986 or so)
1997: CPART
2001: ISPART (the new CPART, which took over METI)
2006: Maxwell Institute (FARMS + ISPART)

Given that all of these projects essentially involved FARMS people, especially in 1990s, I think one can be forgiven for seeing the importance of FARMS in all of these. I doubt there would have even been a Maxwell Institute if there hadn't first been FARMS, and I really wonder how there would have been CPART/ISPART without the scholarly network built by the FARMS crowd (for a long time, they were the same people doing all of it). Indeed, even before it joined BYU, FARMS and FARMS associates were sponsoring conferences and work that was not apologetic (e.g. Dead Sea Scrolls), indicative of larger designs. It seems obvious to me that CPART (later ISPART) was an outgrowth of FARMS, a secular sibling, as was METI to some extent.

Perhaps you are thinking of the Religious Studies Center (earlier, the Center for Religious Studies)? That was formed in 1975, so a decade or more before FARMS, but it has always been and remains a separate entity from the the Maxwell Institute.

Davis was part of METI, Heal came much later, but even Bradford had been part of FARMS. All the brighter names we know and love had been there for some time. It certainly seems to me that the lines between FARMS and CPART/ISPART and METI were sufficiently thin that it was only understandable that the FARMSians would have difficulty seeing the line between FARMS and the Maxwell Institute when it was birthed. I was only an observer, and hardly a sympathetic one, but I could see no such lines at the time, indeed not until the early 2010s really.

I think there were at least two conflicting lines, both of which grew out of FARMS.

1. On the one hand, the Peterson Strand: it looked to me like the creation of the Maxwell Institute was simply a way for FARMS to consolidate its dominance over subsidiary projects that were derived from it in the first place, and to shore up the institutional prestige on campus through the imprimatur of the president of BYU no less than the memory of an apostle. ISPART and METI were academically more legitimate than FARMS, but housing them all in the Maxwell Institute erased that line as well, thus allowing some of that legitimacy to spill onto the apologetic work—at least, that is what I think the attempt was. This brand of FARMSian was exclusive and favored overt apologetics.

2. On the other hand, the Bradford Strand: in the pre-Maxwell Institute days, I once had a conversation with some evangelicals who were doing some text-critical work with ISPART on some New Testament thing or other for a few months (maybe some kind of fellowship; I didn't ask), but they had to spend a lot of time at the FARMS building for some reason that was not clear to me. They found in me a sympathetic ear to some of their discomfort; it was clearly unpleasant for them to associate with a place that they viewed (rightly) as hostile on some level. Now, something like the Maxwell Institute alleviated that by blurring these boundaries. Maybe Peterson was the anti-evangelical editor of the Review on Thursday (or whatever day), but on Monday (or whatever day) he could be the METI guy. There was, in short, enough scholarly furniture as the Maxwell Institute that it made it easier to be both an apologist and a textual critic, or one or the other. This brand of FARMSian was inclusive and favored covert apologetics.

The second strand has obviously won, but now doesn't seem to have any FARMS people associated with it (although it is interesting to note that there are some scholars at BYU who published or worked with FARMS in the 1990s and with the Maxwell Institute in the 2000s but yet have yet to publish/blog with the Interpreter, lending some credence to my claim that there was at least a second, less vocal and less polemical strain of FARMSian). I would not have thought it would dominate and was not even aware of this second strain before the early 2000s, and I doubt very many people were either, so I don't want to rewrite a Whiggish history from the victor's citadel overlooking the gallows where their enemies hang.

Forgive me for my errors, and correct me where I'm wrong.

_________________
"As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them."

—B. Redd McConkie


Last edited by Symmachus on Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:49 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:47 pm
Posts: 6065
Doctor Scratch wrote:
Kairos: I think that the answer is: “Morgan Davis, Jerry Bradford, Kristian Heal, and Carl Griffin, in the Maxwell Institue, with the assistance of Cecil Samuelson and Jeffrey Holland.”


Now that you mention it, there does seem to be an aversion to blaming the people who are obviously responsible for the ouster.

Or are we to think this was done by a rogue middle-management without the sanction, blessing, and direction of the Lord's anointed?

_________________
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:27 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3870
consiglieri wrote:
Now that you mention it, there does seem to be an aversion to blaming the people who are obviously responsible for the ouster.

Or are we to think this was done by a rogue middle-management without the sanction, blessing, and direction of the Lord's anointed?



That's certainly been the narrative that Dan Peterson has been trying to publicly peddle for the last 8 years.

_________________
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:50 pm 
God

Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 1822
Remember when Carly Fiona walked into the HP board room expecting a normal trustee meeting, only to be met by the Board Chair who fired her hardly with a word- she described how that happened in her book! Bottom line - she did not have her six(her corporate ass) covered because she was very loose on getting loyalty from those she got appointed to the HP board and a succcessful coup took her out. She was
Totally caught off guard and went into the sunset.
Is there a lesson here or parallel to Danny's ouster. From above postings seems Danny had a formidable say/control via his Meti and Farms involvement. Did he not calculate the building up of opposition to what the FARMERS were doing? Was the
opposition operating stealthily? Were Maxwell management and policy positions being filled while he was out touch or out of town?
We know the coup occurred and he was surprised
Like Carly that it happened and in a mean sort of way- his view.
So the maestro of Mopologetics failed in keeping his very large six covered by those that mattered.
Just conspiracizin!
k


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:00 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9568
Fascinating post, Symmachus, thank you.

I have a question about the property* you described, an office and a house, does BYU now own the properties and buildings?

*From your comment:
Quote:
FARMS used to have an office on the southern slope of campus, in fact, marked, quite explicitly, with logo and all: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies. There was also Bayt al-Hikma, in that little house on the northern part of campus near the stadium, where some few were occasionally engaged on METI (Middle Eastern Texts Initiative), but there was no Maxwell Institute.

....Everything was absorbed by the Maxwell Institute on its formation in 2006....


I ask because in the Hamblin blog entry I quoted earlier in the thread there was this curious comment, the bolded part concerns my question:
Quote:
Hamblin:

So, as I said, I have nothing inherently against Bradford’s vision. I believe it would have been much better for all concerned if FARMS had remained independent, and could not be seen as a voice of the Church. My objection to Bradford’s policy is that he systematically destroyed classic-FARMS to achieve his vision. The result is that he has taken substantial resources and donations of time, money, land and personnel that were originally given in good faith by donors to support classic-FARMS scholarship, and is diverting them to fund his new vision.
[bolding added]

Bradford obviously was just doing what was expected of him, but if so, what a land grab for BYU. That must have been prime real estate.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:17 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:32 pm
Posts: 1414
Location: Parowan, Utah
Good catch, Lemmie!

Lemmie wrote:
I have a question about the property* you described, an office and a house, does BYU now own the properties and buildings?


I'm sorry to say that I don't know. I know about the two buildings only because I used to walk past them all the time, depending on which part of campus I was entering. I knew about the real Bayt al-Hikma from books, so I did once knock on the door of the little house to ask just why the hell (I mean, heck) they had the Arabic phrase "Bayt al-Hikma" written on a stone sign on the outside. I believe it was Morgan Davis there who told me then about METI (he didn't give me a name, but the pictures online match the image in my memory). It was near the stadium, though I have no idea how good the real estate is there because there are (or at least were) a lot of houses near the stadium. This was before there was a Maxwell Institute.

As for the FARMS building, that was sort of the southern slope, which is quite wooded and has a beautiful pathway that ends near the old Grant library or the Maeser building. I would consider prime real estate, but that is only because of my definition of that includes woods on a hill. I would have thought BYU already owned that, but I really don't know. If they didn't, then I can imagine why they would want to get control of that little property, as everything else on that slope is BYU.

_________________
"As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them."

—B. Redd McConkie


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:28 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9568
Symmachus wrote:
Good catch, Lemmie!

Lemmie wrote:
I have a question about the property* you described, an office and a house, does BYU now own the properties and buildings?


I'm sorry to say that I don't know. I know about the two buildings only because I used to walk past them all the time, depending on which part of campus I was entering. I knew about the real Bayt al-Hikma from books, so I did once knock on the door of the little house to ask just why the hell (I mean, heck) they had the Arabic phrase "Bayt al-Hikma" written on a stone sign on the outside. I believe it was Morgan Davis there who told me then about METI (he didn't give me a name, but the pictures online match the image in my memory). It was near the stadium, though I have no idea how good the real estate is there because there are (or at least were) a lot of houses near the stadium. This was before there was a Maxwell Institute.

As for the FARMS building, that was sort of the southern slope, which is quite wooded and has a beautiful pathway that ends near the old Grant library or the Maeser building. I would consider prime real estate, but that is only because of my definition of that includes woods on a hill. I would have thought BYU already owned that, but I really don't know. If they didn't, then I can imagine why they would want to get control of that little property, as everything else on that slope is BYU.

Interesting, thank you! What a nice story about the Arabic phrase on the stone, I commend your younger self for finding out the details. Vaguely in my mind, the little house where we used to gather on Sunday evenings for chats was in that same section up by the stadium, if so, I know what you mean about the neighborhood of homes. The FARMS property, on the other hand, seems to be in a different category.


Last edited by Lemmie on Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:02 pm 
Nursery
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:50 pm
Posts: 15
Symmachus wrote:
WMLdeWette wrote:
So my timeline is:

1992-ish: METI
1997: FARMS (with a preexistent life going back to 1986 or so)
1997: CPART
2001: ISPART (the new CPART, which took over METI)
2006: Maxwell Institute (FARMS + ISPART)

Given that all of these projects essentially involved FARMS people, especially in 1990s, I think one can be forgiven for seeing the importance of FARMS in all of these. I doubt there would have even been a Maxwell Institute if there hadn't first been FARMS, and I really wonder how there would have been CPART/ISPART without the scholarly network built by the FARMS crowd (for a long time, they were the same people doing all of it). Indeed, even before it joined BYU, FARMS and FARMS associates were sponsoring conferences and work that was not apologetic (e.g. Dead Sea Scrolls), indicative of larger designs. It seems obvious to me that CPART (later ISPART) was an outgrowth of FARMS, a secular sibling, as was METI to some extent.


You are right, to an extent. I was thinking of the Maxwell Institute's earlier name, ISPART, which changed to the Maxwell Institute in 2006. FARMS was organized by Welch in 1979. While you are right that individuals who were a part of FARMS were involved in CPART, ISPART, METI, and then the Maxwell Institute, but for those institutions it was not their involvement in FARMS that was key. It was that they were BYU employees. FARMS was brought to BYU in 1997, but in 2001 taken under the ISPART umbrella, which then changed it's name to the Maxwell Institute in 2006. FARMS was not the key to all of this; rather, the training of a handful of scholars at BYU was crucial. FARMS was tertiary to all of that, but Peterson, Hamblin, Midgley, and others have made it sound like FARMS was the Maxwell Institute when it was only one small part.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:48 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:32 pm
Posts: 1414
Location: Parowan, Utah
WMLdeWette wrote:

You are right, to an extent. I was thinking of the Maxwell Institute's earlier name, ISPART, which changed to the Maxwell Institute in 2006. FARMS was organized by Welch in 1979. While you are right that individuals who were a part of FARMS were involved in CPART, ISPART, METI, and then the Maxwell Institute, but for those institutions it was not their involvement in FARMS that was key. It was that they were BYU employees. FARMS was brought to BYU in 1997, but in 2001 taken under the ISPART umbrella, which then changed it's name to the Maxwell Institute in 2006. FARMS was not the key to all of this; rather, the training of a handful of scholars at BYU was crucial. FARMS was tertiary to all of that, but Peterson, Hamblin, Midgley, and others have made it sound like FARMS was the Maxwell Institute when it was only one small part.


From what I understand, ISPART was formed in 2001, replacing CPART and taking METI in, but not FARMS, which certainly existed beyond 2001 (it was still there when I was there, which was after 2001). As I understand it, FARMS existed until 2006, when the Maxwell Institute was formed and took in all of these. Thus, FARMS did exist alongside but not as a part of ISPART. Is that incorrect?

I am sure you are right as regards the institutional players, and for the early 2010s onward. My point is that the picture suggested above—one where a variety of projects were underway, only one of which involved FARMS—seems not to capture the record, at least of the late 1990s and 2000s. Other than METI, which was always Peterson's baby, just what else was published or being done by anyone under the umbrella of any of these institutes or as a result of their work there until the late 2000s? In other words, what published evidence is there that the existence of ISPART had any results to speak of that could justify its existence at all? FARMS, meanwhile, was rather busy. Within the alphabet soup of METI, ISPART/CPART, FARMS was by far the most active, and I thought that that was actually the problem once FARMS became part of the MI.

From an administrative perspective, you are surely right that FARMS wasn't the justification for the MI, but if we're talking about exaggerative delusions, I'm not sure Peterson is all that wrong for the decade or so after FARMS became part of BYU. Thinking of all those papers published, those talking heads in documentaries, and sponsored conferences under the FARMS aegis, the idea that all that activity was "one small part" seems less than accurate. It was the only thing really going on at the time. Midgley, Peterson, and Co. may seem to be exaggerating from the perspective of how the Maxwell Institute is constituted now, but they had a journal for original scholarship (let's generously call it that for the moment), a review journal, Peterson controlled METI, etc. Elsewhere, ISPART had a project to digitize some Syriac texts, a few things that never went anywhere...and what else? It seems to me that, rather than being one small part, FARMS and the the FARMSians at the early MI constituted the major component of all this, sucking up the resources and dominating the discourse, and that some merely wished it to be one small part (I certainly did).

_________________
"As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them."

—B. Redd McConkie


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:56 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 21487
Location: Koloburbia
Lemmie wrote:
It is the removal of the last vestige of classic-FARMS...


Classic FARMS may be gone, but...

Image
Classic FARMS on manuvers

Regular campus life goes on.

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:01 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9568
Symmachus wrote:
From what I understand, ISPART was formed in 2001, replacing CPART and taking METI in, but not FARMS, which certainly existed beyond 2001 (it was still there when I was there, which was after 2001). As I understand it, FARMS existed until 2006, when the Maxwell Institute was formed and took in all of these. Thus, FARMS did exist alongside but not as a part of ISPART. Is that incorrect?

BYU has an interesting website, where they show organizational units, superior and subordinate units, etc. Of course, this could be just the way it is listed without accurately defining relationships, but it does list FARMS as being subordinate to ISPART, beginning in 2001:
Quote:
Institute for the Study and Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts

The Institute for the Study and Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts (ISPART) was established in 2001...

Assets and Administrative Structure

The Institute for the Study and Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts (ISPART) was the administering body for the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), Center for the Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts (CPART), Middle Eastern Texts Initiative (METI), and Research Technology Group. All divisions functioned under the direction of an executive director who acted in the same capacity as a Dean of an academic department.

Associated Units

Superior unit: Brigham Young University (2001-2006)

Subordinate unit: Center for the Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts (2001-2006)

Subordinate unit: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (2001-2006)

Subordinate unit: Middle Eastern Texts Initiative (2001-2006)

https://byuorg.lib.BYU.edu/index.php/In ... ious_Texts


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:17 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7610
Location: Cassius University
Midgley weighs in:

Quote:
Dan: You are probably not yet aware that the despicable Doctor Scratch on that slime board operated by Dr. Shades has just made public Kristian Heal's abject apology for the nasty plot that he, D. Morgan Davis, Carl Griffin and M. Gerald (Jerry) Bradford were involved in that led to your being fired as editor of the FARMS Review by email when you were in Jerusalem.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:07 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 21487
Location: Koloburbia
Dr. Midgley, since you are following this thread, why not post some of your observations?

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Reflections on the “Apology Letter”
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:31 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm
Posts: 3057
Yes, please weigh in Dr. Midgely. This board needs someone of your apologetic stature and commenting style to enlighten us as to what happened in 2012. I believe that Romney's imminent nomination and the anxiousness that the brethren had at the time to put on the best face led, in part, to reject attack style apologetics all of a sudden. The brethren probably had some reservations about all the name calling and invective, of which you are a master, for some time, and the heightened emotions involved with the Romney nomination led to pulling the plug. It was probably like a parent driving the car with a bunch of kids fighting in the back and then suddenly losing patience and regulating the situation.

What do you think?

_________________
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 17 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group