It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:51 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 264 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:25 pm 
Master Mahan

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:13 pm
Posts: 5604
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
Is it as you suggested above--i.e., that you desired to maintain the "polemical" tone of the review, and you worried that BYU and/or the Brethren would put a stop to it?

I was worried about micromanagerial interference with our editorial decisions.


Why, though? Given other things you've said about BYU and the Brethren, it seems kind of odd that this sort of concern would arise in the first place. What was it, specifically, that led to to worry that such "micromanagerial interference" might happen?


Quote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
Well, I assume it was Prof. Hamblin's "Metcalfe is Butthead" gaffe? Did the Brethren tell you that that sort of thing was unacceptable?

You misunderstand. I referred to a quip made in the course of the affiliation negotiations. It was the only mention of the Review during those discussions, so far as I remember.


What was the quip?

Quote:
You've been seeking to portray the Review as a major reason for the affiliation, and as a principal source of my mythical anxiety an stress over the affiliation. But, though you're as determined as ever in your bizarre theorizing, you're completely wrong. As you typically are.


No, that's not really correct. Particularly in light of this new information, I believe that the Review didn't really have that much to do with the affiliation. In fact, I said as much in my earlier posts on this thread. That said, I do think that the Review represents the heart-and-soul of LDS apologetics. Would you disagree with that?

Quote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
Why don't you track it down? You'd have a far easier time locating it than I would.

Because I don't know what you're talking about, don't care, don't intend to devote additional energy to your Scratchoscopies, and see no important issue here.


You said repeatedly that you'd be interested in seeing it. I guess you've changed your mind?

Quote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
You said that you considered resigning completely from BYU. That seems to extend well beyond garden-variety "frustration."

It was just a passing mood. And I've already explained, several times, what it involved: The affiliation process was so time-consuming and so terribly complex that it brought my research and writing essentially to a halt for a period of two to three years.

If you're not going to believe anything I say, why do you continually pester me with your interrogations?


I believe plenty that you say, Professor P. There's no need to get upset, or to assume that I have ill-intent. I just get the feeling that there was more to your anxiety than you're letting on. Based on what you've said about yourself over the years, it just seems odd that something like this would rattle you to the point that you'd consider resigning---which, it's worth pointing out, probably would have had an even more deleterious effect on your writing and research.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:28 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:28 am
Posts: 7213
Who doesn't think of resigning from their job on occasion?

_________________
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:30 pm 
Master Mahan

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:13 pm
Posts: 5604
Trevor wrote:
Daniel Peterson wrote:
He just won't give it up, folks.

How can I not find this oddly fascinating?


Yeah, it is intriguing. Scratch is looking for any opportunity he can find to call the activities of Mormon apologists into question and discredit their work. It is a quest that has truly taken on a life of its own. As you know, I have sometimes thought it must be a gag of some kind, but I admit defeat. Who would keep a gag going this long? That's religious dedication for you.


Come on now, Trevor. That's not fair. I have praised Richard Bushman and Teryl Givens, so obviously I am not "looking for any opportunity" to "discredit" the apologists. Like you, I'm just curious about the nooks and crannies of this somewhat mysterious institution, and thus, I don't appreciate your comments here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:32 pm 
Seething Cauldron of Hate
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:56 am
Posts: 7173
Mister Scratch wrote:
There's no need to. . . assume that I have ill-intent.

I don't merely assume that.

I have three years of experience as your perpetual target.

You've used up your daily quota of questions. Think carefully about your next interrogation session, because you'll get at most one per day.

_________________

http://mormonscholarstestify.org
http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

I quote dead people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:36 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:15 pm
Posts: 3109
Thanks for an interesting article Mister Scratch. I suspect that with a few fewer references to "behind closed doors" and secret protocols, it would stand as an interesting overview of an interesting chapter in FARMS history. And thanks to DCP for clarifying what needed to be clarified. I suspect this thread will be a landmark addition to the burgeoning field of apologetics research. Not research of an apologetic nature, mind you, but research into apologists (and their methods) themselves.

_________________
Cinepro's Got a Blog


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 1:07 pm 
Hermit
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:12 pm
Posts: 5800
Location: Cave
Mister Scratch,

Any leads on specifics regarding The Protocol of 1995 in addition to the stuff about blessings? I suppose I differ a little here from Cinepro, because I think these protocols were significant. Well, clearly, the apologists must have at that time.

_________________
Elliot Sober: "Our current ignorance is no evidence for the truth of any explanation, creationist or otherwise."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 1:17 pm 
Master Mahan

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:13 pm
Posts: 5604
Gadianton wrote:
Mister Scratch,

Any leads on specifics regarding The Protocol of 1995 in addition to the stuff about blessings?


Part of it had to do with funding, and whether apologists would be paid.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:04 pm 
Seething Cauldron of Hate
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:56 am
Posts: 7173
Mister Scratch wrote:
Part of it had to do with funding, and whether apologists would be paid.

You haven't seen that sinister and mysterious document. You're just making this up.

The discussions during the affiliation process dealt, to a relatively minor extent, with financial issues.

They never, ever, involved any question about "whether apologists would be paid."

You're just making that up.

Why do you continually make these things up?

_________________

http://mormonscholarstestify.org
http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

I quote dead people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:26 pm 
Master Mahan

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:13 pm
Posts: 5604
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:
Part of it had to do with funding, and whether apologists would be paid.

You haven't seen that sinister and mysterious document.


You don't know that. For all you know, the document has now appeared, in .pdf format, in my InBox. *You* are the one who claimed never to have seen it. Remember?


Quote:
The discussions during the affiliation process dealt, to a relatively minor extent, with financial issues.


Well, we're talking about the 1995 Protocol. Not the "discussions."

Quote:
They never, ever, involved any question about "whether apologists would be paid."


Is that not a "financial issue"? And I'm sure you're right: it was no doubt a foregone conclusion that (some) of the apologists would be paid.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:39 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:28 am
Posts: 7213
Mister Scratch wrote:
Come on now, Trevor. That's not fair. I have praised Richard Bushman and Teryl Givens, so obviously I am not "looking for any opportunity" to "discredit" the apologists. Like you, I'm just curious about the nooks and crannies of this somewhat mysterious institution, and thus, I don't appreciate your comments here.


How does praising a couple of LDS scholars show that you are not looking for any opportunity to discredit apologists? I tend to think that our relative species of curiosity differ some. I am sorry that you do not appreciate my comments. I wasn't aware that you were so sensitive about what I thought of your activities. Isn't all of this just good fun? I mean, I know I don't take it all that seriously.

_________________
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:46 pm 
Seething Cauldron of Hate
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:56 am
Posts: 7173
Mister Scratch wrote:
For all you know, the document has now appeared, in .pdf format, in my InBox. *You* are the one who claimed never to have seen it. Remember?

You've been seeking a copy of it. Do you already have it? Were you just playing a game? Are you suppressing it, because it doesn't support your conspiracy fantasies?

This is deeply troubling, a watershed moment in the history of your crusade.

Mister Scratch wrote:
Quote:
The discussions during the affiliation process dealt, to a relatively minor extent, with financial issues.

Well, we're talking about the 1995 Protocol. Not the "discussions."

If you have the document, reveal it! We'll then be able to see what it contains. If you don't have it, you're just making things up. (Big surprise.)

Perhaps you're right, though, and the document contains random things that weren't part of any discussion anywhere. Maybe it contains a wonderful brownie recipe. Who knows?

Mister Scratch wrote:
Quote:
They never, ever, involved any question about "whether apologists would be paid."

Is that not a "financial issue"?

Of course. But that doesn't mean that it was discussed. (It wasn't.)

Scratchite: This is a biology book. It discusses the Indian paintbrush plant.

Sane Person: Yes, it's a biology book. But it doesn't so much as mention Indian paintbrush.

Scratchite: Is Indian paintbrush not a plant? Are plants not biological?

Sane Person: (Sigh.)

Mister Scratch wrote:
And I'm sure you're right: it was no doubt a foregone conclusion that (some) of the apologists would be paid.

Behold the miracle of Scratchlogic.

You speak nonsense. The truth has been pointed out to you more times than I can count. But you don't want the truth.

_________________

http://mormonscholarstestify.org
http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

I quote dead people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:20 pm 
As one who was on the ground floor at FARMS (I became a Welch research assistant the first year he was hired by BYU), and as one who preceded Dr. Peterson in the organization (but, just as a grunt student), I find this thread both fascinating and repelling. Fascinating in the sense that speculation has risen to the level of evidence; repelling in the sense that it is just another hit piece on living individuals.

I just don't see the big deal of FARMS being subsumed in the BYU organization. Before that, there was NWAF. There were many professors who wrote scholarly pieces on Mormon history and upon the Book of Mormon -- some of my favorites included Milt Backman (I was a research assistant for him as well), Monte Nyman (Isaiah and the Book of Mormon), Eldon Ricks, Lou Midgley (kicked out of BYU for being a communist and then reinstated with the intervention of my grandfather, VP Earl Crockett) and many others. Many of their writings would be characterized today, I suppose, as apologetic literature. FARMS is just one more iteration of pro-Church work affiliated with BYU. After FARMS it will be somebody or something else.

I get a lot of value out of some what is published.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:27 pm 
Master Mahan

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:13 pm
Posts: 5604
Bob---

The "big deal" lies in the fact that this marked a clear instance were the Brethren basically admitted that the Church needs a well-organized and well-financed apologetic arm. Either that, or they felt threatened by FARMS's ambitions and rapid growth, and decided to put the leash on.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:43 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:07 pm
Posts: 9979
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Reasonable questions, so I'll answer them. [SNIP!]

Thank you for taking the time; I appreciate it.

rcrocket wrote:
. . . some of my favorites included Milt Backman (I was a research assistant for him as well), Monte Nyman (Isaiah and the Book of Mormon), Eldon Ricks, Lou Midgley (kicked out of BYU for being a communist and then reinstated with the intervention of my grandfather, VP Earl Crockett) and many others.

WTF???

Louis Midgley is, or was, a communist??

_________________
"Apparently it takes LDS Inc. about 5 to 10 years to forget how much it hurt the last time it shot itself in the foot."

--Brother of Jerry, Recovery from Mormonism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:46 pm 
Mister Scratch wrote:
Bob---

The "big deal" lies in the fact that this marked a clear instance were the Brethren basically admitted that the Church needs a well-organized and well-financed apologetic arm. Either that, or they felt threatened by FARMS's ambitions and rapid growth, and decided to put the leash on.


I am really not all that connected any more, having practiced law now for 27 years away from the Wasatch Front, but I do have many clients in Utah -- some pretty well connected to the Church.

Sure, FARMS is big, sort of. But, the Church is big. Thirty years ago, before FARMS existed, the apologetic mantle was shared by a loose consortium of BYU professors, UofU professors and amateur enthusiasts who would hold symposia and conventions, and finance ventures, with the tacit approval of the Brethren. The Sydney B. Sperry Symposium was an example, as was and as is the NWAF

Today, FARMS, in terms of enthusiasts and contributors, is much larger. What FARMS has done, much to its credit, has involved rank amateurs (such as myself) as contributors to materials published under its banners. That has done much to broaden interest in the stakes about what is the latest and greatest in scholarship and thinking. As I have said many times before, some of it is truly great stuff; some of it is not. But, FARMS (or the Maxwell Institute) in recent years has become an academic force with which to be reckoned, as it has developed impressive expertise in Islamic and Near Eastern studies and the preservation of texts. And, as much as you don't like it, I think that some of what FARMS has to say about the Book of Mormon is very interesting and enlightening to one who believes. I just don't see the big deal that money is being spent on this venture, that buildings are being raised, and funds solicited. People aren't contributing with a gun to their heads.

I don't see how this is much different than the ventures pursued by sectarian colleges around the world. I suspect you don't think the Bible is the Word of God much less valuable literature, yet much money has been spent in the last 200 years bringing to light academic thinking upon it.


Last edited by rcrocket on Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:53 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:48 pm 
Dr. Shades wrote:

Louis Midgley is, or was, a communist??


This subject has been previously covered on your board. I marvel at your naïveté.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:54 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:07 pm
Posts: 9979
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
rcrocket wrote:
This subject has been previously covered on your board. I marvel at your naïveté.

My apologies. Unlike you, I simply do not have the time to read every word of every sentence posted to this message board.

For those of us, like myself, who can't afford to follow this board as closely as you do, will you please elaborate on the Midgley/communist story?

_________________
"Apparently it takes LDS Inc. about 5 to 10 years to forget how much it hurt the last time it shot itself in the foot."

--Brother of Jerry, Recovery from Mormonism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:59 pm 
Dr. Shades wrote:
rcrocket wrote:
This subject has been previously covered on your board. I marvel at your naïveté.

My apologies. Unlike you, I simply do not have the time to read every word of every sentence posted to this message board.

For those of us, like myself, who can't afford to follow this board as closely as you do, will you please elaborate on the Midgley/communist story?


As closely as I do? I am away for months at a time.

I've told you privately that unless you restore my signature abilities, I will be away for good.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:03 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:07 pm
Posts: 9979
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
rcrocket wrote:
As closely as I do? I am away for months at a time.

Are you, or are you not, the one who called me naïve for not seeing the post(s) about Louis Midgley being a communist? Try to stay focused, counsel.

Now, please answer the original question and elaborate on Louis Midgley being a communist.

Quote:
I've told you privately that unless you restore my signature abilities, I will be away for good.

I **DID** restore your signature abilities. Click on "User CP," click on "Profile," click on "Signature," then add one.

_________________
"Apparently it takes LDS Inc. about 5 to 10 years to forget how much it hurt the last time it shot itself in the foot."

--Brother of Jerry, Recovery from Mormonism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:25 pm 
Here's something I found (I didn't find anything using a search on this board):

Quote:
Spy Ring

“On 19 April 1966 Ernest Wilkinson [BYU president] asked his administrative assistant to organize a group of ‘conservative’ students to ‘monitor’ professors who were regarded as Communist sympathizers. Nearly all of these professors had publicly condemned the John Birch Society. Among them was political scientist Louis Midgley whose anti-Birch article in the Daily Universe had resulted in a muzzling of the newspaper two years earlier.... For a year Stephen Hays Russell, student-leader of this ‘spy ring,’ had already been reporting to the local Birch Society chapter and to Wilkinson about some of these professors.
“On 20 April Russell organized ten to fifteen other Birch students in a room of BYU’s Wilkinson Center. A non-student chapter leader of the society acted as guard. This room was the regular meeting place for BYU’s Young Americans for Freedom, and each prospective spy was invited to this ‘special YAF meeting, to be held at the regular place, 370 ELWC. These students included the president of BYU’s Young Americans for Freedom and Cleon Skousen’s [author of The Naked Communist] nephew Mark.... What linked these students was their participation in the Provo chapter of the Birch Society and the BYU chapter of Young Americans for Freedom.”

- see D. Michael Quinn, Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power, p. 93 (Emphasis added)


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building the FARMS Ziggurat
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:28 pm 
Quinn got a lot wrong. I have interviewed three of the expelled professors. One later became a General Authority. One was a client of mine. One was a professor of mine. The future general authority alone refused to be reinstated when my grandfather intervened with Pres. McKay and got their jobs back. As I went through BYU, many of the older professors recognized my name and expressed their thoughts on the subject.

More here: http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/docume ... 6829&REC=1

The last time we covered this subject, Scratch called me a liar and accused me of making this stuff up. [He had never heard of the "Spy Ring" incident and thought the term applied to recent monitoring of homosexuals. Now, there's naïveté.]


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 264 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Analytics, Arrakis, BartBurk, Bazooka, cinepro, Google [Bot], Jaybear, Mayan Elephant, No_Hidden_Agenda, Sister Mary Lisa, Yahoo [Bot] and 33 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