164 replies to this topic

[Tacenda]

Someone mentioned Dr. Michael Coe in one of the threads.  I checked to make sure this wasn't already discussed and nothing came up.  Anyhow, I'm very curious to know if any of the apologetics on here listened to it and what your thoughts were.

.

[why me]

Tacenda, on 02 July 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

Someone mentioned Dr. Michael Coe in one of the threads.  I checked to make sure this wasn't already discussed and nothing came up.  Anyhow, I'm very curious to know if any of the apologetics on here listened to it and what your thoughts were.

.

Why not provide a link? Okay here it is:

http://mormonstories...on-archaeology/

Edited by why me, 02 July 2012 - 02:36 PM.

[Tacenda]

why me, on 02 July 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

Why not provide a link? Okay here it is:

http://mormonstories...on-archaeology/

Thanks still new here.

[cursor]

My father (John L. Sorenson) wrote an open letter to Dr. Coe after I sent him a link to that interview. I'll run through my emails, find it, then make it available.

[edit: actually, I sent him to a copy of the podcast at the PBS website: http://www.pbs.org/m...views/coe.html]

Edited by cursor, 02 July 2012 - 02:46 PM.

[calmoriah]

http://www.mormondia...dr-michael-coe/

For some reason the search didn't work this time around so I used google.  This is a long thread, you can scan through it for the substantive posts, there is a lot of irrelevant stuff going on.

http://www.mormondia...on-archaeology/

More specific off the bat....

http://www.mormondia...s-ms-interview/

http://www.mormondia...entry1209060671 (specific post)

You can find numerous other miscellaneous posts by googling site:mormondialogue.org "michael coe".

[why me]

Tacenda, on 02 July 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:

Thanks still new here.

Here is something else:

http://en.fairmormon.../Maya_and_Olmec

And here is more that FAIR has said about it all:

http://www.google.co... coe&gsc.page=1

Edited by why me, 02 July 2012 - 03:02 PM.

[Tacenda]

calmoriah, on 02 July 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

http://www.mormondia...dr-michael-coe/

For some reason the search didn't work this time around so I used google.  This is a long thread, you can scan through it for the substantive posts, there is a lot of irrelevant stuff going on.

http://www.mormondia...on-archaeology/

More specific off the bat....

http://www.mormondia...s-ms-interview/

http://www.mormondia...entry1209060671 (specific post)

You can find numerous other miscellaneous posts by googling site:mormondialogue.org "michael coe".

why me, on 02 July 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

Here is something else:

http://en.fairmormon.../Maya_and_Olmec

And here is more that FAIR has said about it all:

http://www.google.co... coe&gsc.page=1

Thanks for these, I'll check them out.

[cursor]

I recall now that my father handed me a printout of the open response letter (about 10+ pages long). If I can't get him to email me a digital version, I'll locate my hardcopy (then scan it and make it available here as a PDF doc.

[Pahoran]

Quaere: Michael Coe is not a Mormon.  Michael Coe never has been a Mormon.

So how, exactly, is any interview he might give a "Mormon story?"  He has no "Mormon story" to tell.

Wait, something's just occurred to me.  Dr Coe is fairly well-known for having a disdainful attitude towards the Book of Mormon.  Could it be that Mister Dehlin found that such an attitude was useful to his so-called "Mormonstories" enterprise?

And does that mean that "Mormonstories" is really an anti-Mormon propaganda mill?

Regards,
Pahoran

[Tacenda]

cursor, on 02 July 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

I recall now that my father handed me a printout of the open response letter (about 10+ pages long). If I can't get him to email me a digital version, I'll locate my hardcopy (then scan it and make it available here as a PDF doc.

That would be very nice of you, but don't go to alot of trouble!

[why me]

Pahoran, on 02 July 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

Quaere: Michael Coe is not a Mormon.  Michael Coe never has been a Mormon.

So how, exactly, is any interview he might give a "Mormon story?"  He has no "Mormon story" to tell.

Wait, something's just occurred to me.  Dr Coe is fairly well-known for having a disdainful attitude towards the Book of Mormon.  Could it be that Mister Dehlin found that such an attitude was useful to his so-called "Mormonstories" enterprise?

And does that mean that "Mormonstories" is really an anti-Mormon propaganda mill?

Regards,
Pahoran

My thoughts exactly. Listening to this podcast, I thought that Michael Coe would choke on his glee in disproving the book of mormon. And yes, this podcast is antimormon, especially when talking about the members who left the fold over archeology. Also, he made some antimormon comments about utah mormons not accepting those who left because of archeology.

And I do think that John knew exactly what he was doing.

Edited by why me, 02 July 2012 - 03:32 PM.

[why me]

Here is what Kevin Christensen wrote on John's comment section of the podcast:

Kevin Christensen on September 7, 2011

“Better” of course, is a value judgment.   If “better” is all about celebrity endorsement, and general newsworthiness, then an obscure dweeb like me is of little value, an annoyance, “better” dismissed.  Living and working far from Big Names, and being just a little one myself, I have nothing to deliver that you value.  A few dozen articles in various places is all. Twice footnoted by D. Michael Quinn, FWIW.
The sources you select, the questions you ask, as well as the sources you neglect and the questions that you don’t ask, proclaim the values you hold.  It’s been obvious to me for years that you are idealistic, and mean well, and strive to give voice to those who feel victimized, betrayed, silenced and excluded in their LDS experience.  I get it.  It’s clearly important to you to tell all about multiple first vision accounts, money digging, polygamy and polyandry, Mountain Meadows and aversion therapy at BYU  in the 70s.  As it happens, when I’ve taught and commented in LDS culture, I’ve had no problem discussing such matters, and pointing interested students to available resources.  When I do, I also point out that if you expect or demand perfection of Mormonism, imperfection, and only imperfection, is decisive. Nothing else answers the question. That fact of logic  explains the life quest of Jerald Tanner.  On the other hand, as Tevye would say, if you are asking what is real, a completely different set of information comes into play.  Broad perspectives matter far more than imperfections, which still count in the balance, but don’t carry decisive weight.  And it’s clearly important to you to face the hard “truth as Coe sees it” of the Book of Mormon as without any supporting evidence whatsoever and as supporting racism, as therefore both false and harmful.  It’s what you asked for and got from one guaranteed to deliver in the present as he had in 1973 and for the recent PBS interviews.  For such purposes, I don’t know who could be better.
In my value system, “Better” on the topic of the Book of Mormon involves any who provide close and careful reading, and serious effort to stay current on the most important research.  And “best” are those like Brant Gardner, John Sorenson, John Clark, Allen Christenson, John W. Welch, Daniel Peterson,  Ben McGuire, Diane Wirth, John Tvedtnes, Larry Poulson, Grant Hardy, Hugh Nibley, Richard Bushman, Matt Roper, Gordon Thomasson, and Margaret Barker, to name a few, who in their writings and observations, teach me to see things in the Book of Mormon that I had never imagined on my own.  Different soil and nurture for the seed, and a hundred fold harvest, compared to what I get from Coe.  No mystery about why the difference either.  “Know ye not this parable?” says Jesus.  “How then will ye know all parables?”  Such readings help me better comprehend the message and the value of the Book of Mormon, while recognizing both the current strengths, and open problems.  Far better.  It happens that most of their significant work has been published since Coe did his research for his 1973 Dialogue article, and since he read No Man Knows My History and therein took the full and final measure of Joseph Smith.
Life is full, and life goes on.  My path with my purposes, and you in yours.  Live long, and prosper.
Kevin Christensen

[why me]

Also, in part 3 of the interview at 15:15 dan peterson is mention by John. Not good at all. Dan was compared to a marxist by michael coe. Not that I have anything against marxists but I am sure that Dan would not appreciate it.

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

It's also worth pointing out Brant Gardner's interview, which is the level-headed and classy cure to Coe's arguments.

(Also, I was finally able to read Gardner's book The Gift and Power: Translating the Book of Mormon recently, so now I'm able to heartily recommend it as a must-read for anyone interested in the translation issues.)

[why me]

But I think that Michael comes up short about Joseph Smith in around 30 minutes into part 3 of the podcast. Michael has a difficult time in explaining just how Joseph wrote the book of mormon at such an early age. But john also brings up two anti mormon books  at around 35 minutes into part 3 and asks Coe to comment on them. It seems that John needs to name drop such books.

[cursor]

Attached is the Open Letter to Michael Coe, from John L. Sorenson.

Attached Files

•  OpenLetterCoe.pdf   80.21K   108 downloads

Edited by cursor, 02 July 2012 - 03:55 PM.

[Tacenda]

cursor, on 02 July 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Attached is the Open Letter to Michael Coe, from John L. Sorenson.

Thanks for this letter to Dr. Coe, gives me alot to think about.

Edited by Tacenda, 02 July 2012 - 04:12 PM.

[Bob Crockett]

Pahoran, on 02 July 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

Quaere: Michael Coe is not a Mormon.  Michael Coe never has been a Mormon.

So how, exactly, is any interview he might give a "Mormon story?"  He has no "Mormon story" to tell.

Wait, something's just occurred to me.  Dr Coe is fairly well-known for having a disdainful attitude towards the Book of Mormon.  Could it be that Mister Dehlin found that such an attitude was useful to his so-called "Mormonstories" enterprise?

And does that mean that "Mormonstories" is really an anti-Mormon propaganda mill?

Having read Coe's Breaking the Maya Code or whatever it is called, I can see that he loves being in the middle of controversy and stirring things up.   Ordinarily, I'd be surprised that a national scholar would waste his time with somebody like Dehlin, but not Mr. Coe.  

Dehlin's a character, no doubt.  His 15 minutes of fame is expanding.

[cursor]

You're certainly welcome. It was no big deal.

My father tells me that it will soon be published in a future version of Mormon Studies Review. Watch for it. Oh, wait ... you already have a copy!

[Tacenda]

why me, on 02 July 2012 - 03:38 PM, said:

Here is what Kevin Christensen wrote on John's comment section of the podcast:

Kevin Christensen on September 7, 2011

“Better” of course, is a value judgment.   If “better” is all about celebrity endorsement, and general newsworthiness, then an obscure dweeb like me is of little value, an annoyance, “better” dismissed.  Living and working far from Big Names, and being just a little one myself, I have nothing to deliver that you value.  A few dozen articles in various places is all. Twice footnoted by D. Michael Quinn, FWIW.
The sources you select, the questions you ask, as well as the sources you neglect and the questions that you don’t ask, proclaim the values you hold.  It’s been obvious to me for years that you are idealistic, and mean well, and strive to give voice to those who feel victimized, betrayed, silenced and excluded in their LDS experience.  I get it.  It’s clearly important to you to tell all about multiple first vision accounts, money digging, polygamy and polyandry, Mountain Meadows and aversion therapy at BYU  in the 70s.  As it happens, when I’ve taught and commented in LDS culture, I’ve had no problem discussing such matters, and pointing interested students to available resources.  When I do, I also point out that if you expect or demand perfection of Mormonism, imperfection, and only imperfection, is decisive. Nothing else answers the question. That fact of logic  explains the life quest of Jerald Tanner.  On the other hand, as Tevye would say, if you are asking what is real, a completely different set of information comes into play.  Broad perspectives matter far more than imperfections, which still count in the balance, but don’t carry decisive weight.  And it’s clearly important to you to face the hard “truth as Coe sees it” of the Book of Mormon as without any supporting evidence whatsoever and as supporting racism, as therefore both false and harmful.  It’s what you asked for and got from one guaranteed to deliver in the present as he had in 1973 and for the recent PBS interviews.  For such purposes, I don’t know who could be better.
In my value system, “Better” on the topic of the Book of Mormon involves any who provide close and careful reading, and serious effort to stay current on the most important research.  And “best” are those like Brant Gardner, John Sorenson, John Clark, Allen Christenson, John W. Welch, Daniel Peterson,  Ben McGuire, Diane Wirth, John Tvedtnes, Larry Poulson, Grant Hardy, Hugh Nibley, Richard Bushman, Matt Roper, Gordon Thomasson, and Margaret Barker, to name a few, who in their writings and observations, teach me to see things in the Book of Mormon that I had never imagined on my own.  Different soil and nurture for the seed, and a hundred fold harvest, compared to what I get from Coe.  No mystery about why the difference either.  “Know ye not this parable?” says Jesus.  “How then will ye know all parables?”  Such readings help me better comprehend the message and the value of the Book of Mormon, while recognizing both the current strengths, and open problems.  Far better.  It happens that most of their significant work has been published since Coe did his research for his 1973 Dialogue article, and since he read No Man Knows My History and therein took the full and final measure of Joseph Smith.
Life is full, and life goes on.  My path with my purposes, and you in yours.  Live long, and prosper.
Kevin Christensen

Thanks Why Me, I think I've found the Mother Lode of defenders of my faith on MD&D.

Edited by Tacenda, 02 July 2012 - 04:16 PM.