RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
Post Reply
User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 2841
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Hagoth » Fri Jan 11, 2019 6:50 am

I finally found time to listen to Radio Free Mormon's discussion with Bill Reel about BoA issues and, as expected, it was excellent. I've studied a lot about the BoA but I found some really good stuff here, especially the discussion about Brian Hauglid's team change, and about the anti-scholarly tactics of John Gee and Kerry Muhlstein. I can't believe Gee fell back on Packer's The Mantle Is Far Far Greater abomination as justification for deceptive scholarship. He actually quotes Packer in saying that telling the whole truth will make someone accountable for covenant breaking.

Consiglieri and Bill listen to FAIRMormon conferences so you don't have to!

It gave me some good stuff to add to my annotated BoA essay. Like the fact that Hauglid is cited 8 times in the endnotes, but has now joined Dan Vogel's (Joseph made it up) camp, and Gee is cited 13 times even though he has publicly stated that the "landmines" and "grenades" of truth must be kept hidden from us ordinary folks lest we lose fingers that we need for our testimony glove.

If you're reading this Consiglieri, yes please do the third follow-up episode.
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

User avatar
Red Ryder
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:14 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Red Ryder » Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:37 am

...landmines" and "grenades" of truth must be kept hidden from us ordinary folks lest we lose fingers that we need for our testimony glove.
That's a great quote.

It'll be interesting to follow Bill's trajectory now that he's been exed. Prominent anti-mormon or content ex-mormon with a "mormon hobby"?

Can you post another link to your updated essay?
Those who do not move do not notice their chains. —Rosa Luxemburg

User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 2841
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Hagoth » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:53 am

Red Ryder wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:37 am

Can you post another link to your updated essay?
It's getting pretty long (sorry). But it's action-packed!
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Logow ... qOhleGrdc
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

User avatar
Red Ryder
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:14 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Red Ryder » Fri Jan 11, 2019 11:37 am

Hagoth wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:53 am
Red Ryder wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:37 am

Can you post another link to your updated essay?
It's getting pretty long (sorry). But it's action-packed!
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Logow ... qOhleGrdc
Thanks

I noticed a minor typo. "actually actually"
The canonized preface to the Book of Abraham makes it very clear that we are to believe that it was actually actually written by Abraham upon papyrus:
Those who do not move do not notice their chains. —Rosa Luxemburg

User avatar
slavereeno
Posts: 959
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:30 am
Location: QC, AZ

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by slavereeno » Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:19 pm

I listened to both of these as well, they were fantastic.

User avatar
Mormorrisey
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Mormorrisey » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:29 pm

Just finished listening to both parts, some great stuff. I sure hope it summarizes the Vogel videos, so I don't have to spend the time watching them! They seem interesting, I just have a life outside of Mormonism.

On a side note, it's taken me a while to appreciate Vogel's work. I read his Religious Seekers book in the late 1990s for a Master's project and liked it far less than reading what Brooke and Quinn had to say. But I did read The Making of a Prophet a few years ago and completely bought into the pious fraud argument, rather than what Brodie was selling.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."

User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 2841
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Hagoth » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:49 pm

Red Ryder wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 11:37 am

I noticed a minor typo. "actually actually"
Thanks. There are probably probably a lot more.
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

Reuben
Posts: 890
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 3:01 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Reuben » Fri Jan 11, 2019 8:31 pm

Red Ryder wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:37 am
...landmines" and "grenades" of truth must be kept hidden from us ordinary folks lest we lose fingers that we need for our testimony glove.
That's a great quote.
To show that Hagoth isn't taking Gee out of context, here's a direct quote, from https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/a ... of-pottage.
Defending the faith is a lot like having a job defusing land mines. The job is to protect others, but one never knows if a new bomb is instead going to blow up on the one trying to defuse it. Unfortunately, I know a number of casualties. From this perspective, those who think that participating in academia gives one a license to [experiment] with any and all pyrotechnics are dangerous – to themselves and to others. Continuing the metaphor, much as we might marvel at an individual’s abilities of seeing how many live hand grenades he can juggle, doing so is irresponsible. And the juggler almost never takes responsibility when the grenades start flying off and going off in the audience. Some even appear to enjoy the resulting chaos and carnage.
I've studied a lot of different things. The only topics that ever need the level of care to present that Gee suggests are those relating to exclusive religious truth claims. (Political claims can come close, though.) In all the others, if I get ahead of myself or I'm taught without careful pedagogy, I just get confused and stuck. But somehow, the road to understanding in fundamentalist religion is littered with land mines.

Gee, buddy, those land mines also go by the name of strong admissible counterevidence and arguments. They're only harmful because your church makes them harmful.
You were born to trust, not fear. It is your birthright.

User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 2841
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Hagoth » Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:03 pm

Reuben wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 8:31 pm
I've studied a lot of different things. The only topics that ever need the level of care to present that Gee suggests are those relating to exclusive religious truth claims.
Imagine a physics professor being threatened that he "will be accountable" if he taught his students that electrons have both the properties of a particle and a wave. They might not be prepared for a landmine that would threaten their former belief about the properties of light.

Here's the Packer statement that Gee quotes in this presentation (emphasis mine):
"One who chooses to follow the tenets of his profession, regardless of how they may injure the Church or destroy the faith of those not ready for ‘advanced history,’ is, himself, in spiritual jeopardy. If that one is a member of the Church, he has broken his covenants and will be accountable. And I want to say in all seriousness that there is a limit to the patience of the Lord with respect to those who are under covenant to bless and protect his church and kingdom upon the earth but do not do it.”
And thus we see that scholars like Gee and Muhlstein who believe the leaders of the church are the anointed of God feel compelled and justified in deceiving their readers and students because they believe their own salvation depends on it.
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by jfro18 » Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:01 am

Hagoth wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 6:50 am
It gave me some good stuff to add to my annotated BoA essay. Like the fact that Hauglid is cited 8 times in the endnotes, but has now joined Dan Vogel's (Joseph made it up) camp
One thing here that I am confused on... I know that Hauglid came out and said he will no longer participate in apologetics and that he agrees with Vogel that there is no long/lost scroll, but has he given any indication that he doesn't believe in the Book of Abraham anymore?

My inference was that he is now falling back to the catalyst theory as he works for the church/BYU... so I thought he was just basically saying 'the apologetics are garbage' but still maintaining truth.

Anyone know that to be an incorrect line of thought?

User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 2841
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Hagoth » Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:47 am

jfro18 wrote:
Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:01 am
One thing here that I am confused on... I know that Hauglid came out and said he will no longer participate in apologetics and that he agrees with Vogel that there is no long/lost scroll, but has he given any indication that he doesn't believe in the Book of Abraham anymore?

My inference was that he is now falling back to the catalyst theory as he works for the church/BYU... so I thought he was just basically saying 'the apologetics are garbage' but still maintaining truth.

Anyone know that to be an incorrect line of thought?
He said:
1- Gee and Muhlstein's apologetics are "abhorent"
2- He no longer engages in apologetics
3-He "wholeheartedly agrees" with "Dan's excellent assessment"
4- Brent Metcalfe (non-believing BoA critic) can attest to his "transformative journey"
5- His latest scholarship is "much more open to Dan's thinking on the origin of the Book of Abraham"

It sounds to me like he's finding a way to tiptoe around a denial of a literal belief in the BoA. Maybe he's still on board with the catalyst theory but he's certainly not saying that here; he's saying that he has stepped out of the ring of even trying to defend the BoA. We are left to draw our own ultimate conclusions. As long as he's employed by the church he's not going to say anything directly and unquestionably critical of the BoA's veracity. As far as I'm concerned his change of alliance from the apologists to the critics, especially in the specific naming of names, says it all. He speaks scornfully of the apologists and praises the work of the critics.
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

User avatar
Ghost
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 11:40 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by Ghost » Sun Jan 13, 2019 11:35 am

Hagoth wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:53 am
It's getting pretty long (sorry). But it's action-packed!
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Logow ... qOhleGrdc
I think I have seen this before, but I enjoyed reading it (again?) just now. Thanks for sharing.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 784
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: RFM: missing scrolls & catalyst theories

Post by jfro18 » Sun Jan 13, 2019 5:04 pm

Hagoth wrote:
Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:47 am
He said:
1- Gee and Muhlstein's apologetics are "abhorent"
2- He no longer engages in apologetics
3-He "wholeheartedly agrees" with "Dan's excellent assessment"
4- Brent Metcalfe (non-believing BoA critic) can attest to his "transformative journey"
5- His latest scholarship is "much more open to Dan's thinking on the origin of the Book of Abraham"
When you put it that way... :lol:

I made a comment about this on Twitter a week or so ago and someone messaged me to say that I was making a leap to say that Hauglid didn't believe in the BoA based on that comment (I didn't say that directly but clearly I was pointing out that he dropped his earlier apologetics once he got into the details), and honestly I can see where you'd make that jump as a believer.

But to your point... he's still paid by the church and can't completely let go of the BoA considering who is going to be paying his salary, insurance, and likely pension. So for him to come this far is really, really telling and for him to take shows at Gee and Muhlstein was to me a shot he didn't need to take.

The BoA is such a mess, and every time I read a new theory (it was the Sed festival or it was on another scroll or Joseph never said he translated beyond revelation) it just makes me so frustrating that very few members even know what a complete trainwreck this is for the church.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests