Teaser From The Maxwell Institute

[Daniel Peterson]

I don't want to give this a rest

You can do whatever you want, of course. I've got other things on my plate, though, so you're going to have to rehearse this over and over and over again without my assistance.

a consistent and unapologetic implementation of poor judgment.

Yup. That's me, alright. Nearly a quarter of a century centrally involved with what is now the Maxwell Institute. Films produced, a multi-million-dollar endowment raised, a major translation series launched, a Dead Sea Scrolls database and other digitization projects created, access to the Vatican Apostolic Library achieved, affiliation with the University negotiated, many thousands of pages published, hundreds of firesides given, etc., etc., and etc., all on the basis of "a consistent and unapologetic implementation of poor judgment." That's why so many people have rallied to Interpreter, too. It's because they're mesmerized by my consistent display of poor judgment.

Or if you toned it down a bit you might also maintain better institutional relationships.

I have excellent institutional relationships, with many institutions. I have a problem with a small handful of people at one small institution. And you sound as if you could be one of them.

I apologize if any of this offends you

It doesn't offend me. I just think it's stupid and presumptuous.

I'm also open to be proven otherwise on any of this.

You're not making statements of objective fact. There's no proof (or disproof) to be had regarding such airy pop-psychological speculations.

I think the war/enemy imagery is so ingrained in you that you're not always self-aware of the ways in which your words construct mental landscapes for others where your metaphorical enemies become worthy of contempt.

What nonsense.

And you're simply wrong -- even if you're one of that handful referred to above, none of whom really knows me very well -- to think that I'm focused on "war/enemy imagery." I'm not, actually. Certainly no more than was Elder Maxwell, and certainly less so than many of the hymns ("Shall the youth of Zion falter in defending truth and right? While the enemy assaileth, shall we shrink or shun the fight?" "Onward, Christian soldiers!" "The wicked who fight against Zion shall surely be smitten at last," and etc. ) and many texts of scripture ("the sword of truth," "the breastplate of righteousness," "the war in heaven," and so forth). If you have a problem with such imagery, which is scarcely characteristic of my writing or thinking, I suggest that you take it up with the Lord, or with his Church.

I think you're angry and hurt over the MI situation and that these feelings further cloud your judgment about the implication of your words.

I think that much of what has happened over the past ten months is wrong, but I'm hardly maddened with rage, and my judgment is quite unclouded.

I think you wouldn't mind, for instance, if someone read your comparison between MI and Stalin, and then went beyond your stated intention to think worse of MI (and perhaps even stop donating).

I think that much of what has been done by the current leadership of the Maxwell Institute over the past ten months or so has been wrong and misguided. I've been entirely candid about that, and certainly have no need to try to embed it in secret codes. But I've done absolutely nothing to dissuade anybody from donating to the Institute. I had the principal donors to the Institute with me for two weeks in Turkey during September of last year, several weeks after I had been purged from the Institute, and I said nothing at all to them during that time (and have said nothing to them since that time) to persuade them against donating. I'm scarcely going to be trying to influence people here against giving money to the Maxwell Institute when, having a golden opportunity to do so with the Institute's major donors, I made no such effort.

I think you might even like stirring the pot because it makes discussion seem more worthwhile.

I don't even know what that means.

I think you might also feel a need for "enemies" because it seems to give your work more purpose.

You must have read a psychology book once. Not a very good one, though. Don't quit your day job.

Lastly, I think you feel like you're doing the right thing in making these baggage-heavy comparisons.

How many are we talking about? I thought it was just one -- the one in which, via subliminal suggestion, I supposedly encouraged my brain-dead followers to believe that Josef Stalin has returned and now leads the Maxwell Institute, or some such dunderheaded notion.

But yes, I think the illustration that I used was perfectly fine, and quite unobjectionable (among reasonable people, anyway).

By the way, I had to drive from Orem to Bountiful and back this evening with two of my sons, and we ended up laughing about favorite comedy videos that we've seen. Here's one:

[media=]

I began thinking how many ways somebody like you could choose -- and, if it involved me, likely would choose -- to be righteously offended by that little routine. And so, mentioning your complaints on this thread to my sons, I said that I bet we could find twenty signs along I-15 that, if we put our minds to it, we could regard as offensive to us or to somebody else. Piece of cake. We found five in the space of a couple of miles and then gave the quest up, on the grounds that it simply wasn't very challenging.

.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Daniel Peterson

[canard78]

These endorsements are pretty good too:

• Philip L. Barlow, Leonard J. Arrington Chair of Mormon History and Culture, Utah State University
  
• Richard L. Bushman, Gouverneur Morris Professor of History, emeritus, Columbia University
  
• Douglas J. Davies, Professor of Theology and Religion, Durham University
  
• Eric A. Eliason, Professor of English, Brigham Young University
  
• James E. Faulconer, Richard L. Evans Professor of Religious Understanding, Professor of Philosophy, Brigham Young University
  
• Kathleen Flake, Associate Professor of American Religious History, Vanderbilt University
  
• Terryl L. Givens, James A. Bostwick Chair of English and Professor of Literature and Religion, University of Richmond
  
• Sarah Barringer Gordon, Arlin M. Adams Professor of Constitutional Law and Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania
  
• Matthew J. Grow, Director of Publications, Church History Department, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
  
• Grant Hardy, Professor of History and Religious Studies, University of North Carolina—Asheville
  
• David F. Holland, Associate Professor of History, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  
• Laurie F. Maffly-Kipp, Professor and Chair, Department of Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  
• Patrick Q. Mason, Howard W. Hunter Chair of Mormon Studies, Claremont Graduate University
  
• Quincy D. Newell, Associate Professor of Religious Studies, University of Wyoming
  
• Grant Underwood, Professor of History, Brigham Young University
  
• 
  

There are a few names on that list who I've already handed cash-for-books to. That is a really exciting list of board members. Grant Hardy, if you're reading, I'm delighted.

[CASteinman]

I think the war/enemy imagery is so ingrained in you that you're not always self-aware of the ways in which your words construct mental landscapes for others where your metaphorical enemies become worthy of contempt. I think you're angry and hurt over the MI situation and that these feelings further cloud your judgment about the implication of your words. I think you wouldn't mind, for instance, if someone read your comparison between MI and Stalin, and then went beyond your stated intention to think worse of MI (and perhaps even stop donating). I think you might even like stirring the pot because it makes discussion seem more worthwhile. I think you might also feel a need for "enemies" because it seems to give your work more purpose. Lastly, I think you feel like you're doing the right thing in making these baggage-heavy comparisons.

That was rather a long tirade of personal attack.

http://www.itsonlyaplanet.com/uncivil-internet-1-11-13.html

[Daniel Peterson]

That is a really exciting list of board members.

It is, indeed, a good list of Mormon studies people. It's unclear how active the Advisory Board will be -- some are very active, many are largely for show and very . . . not -- but it's a good list.

Three of them have promised entries for Mormon Scholars Testify:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

Four of them have already provided entries for Mormon Scholars Testify:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/396/richard-lyman-bushman

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/484/james-e-faulconer

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/1904/terryl-l-givens

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/243/grant-hardy

One of them is on the editorial board of Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture, and another has just been published in Interpreter.

[canard78]

It is, indeed, a good list of Mormon studies people. It's unclear how active the Advisory Board will be -- some are very active, many are largely for show and very . . . not -- but it's a good list.

Three of them have promised entries for Mormon Scholars Testify:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

Four of them have already provided entries for Mormon Scholars Testify:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/396/richard-lyman-bushman

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/484/james-e-faulconer

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/1904/terryl-l-givens

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/243/grant-hardy

One of them is on the editorial board of Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture, and another has just been published in Interpreter.

FWIW (and as someone of little consequence, so worth very little), I agree that it would be a shame is the MI first assimilated and then effectively lost interest in the FARMS heritage of mesoamerican/Lehi in the desert style investigation. I remember the excitement in our home in the 90s when the latest printed newsletter would come out and it would be combed through to see what other books or articles might be added to my parents' book list.

I also thought you made a very good point that the millions donated to FARMS will now not be used for what might have been the donors original intended purpose. Given it's BYU and the church they might feel a little uncomfortable about raising that concern.

[canard78]

It is, indeed, a good list of Mormon studies people. It's unclear how active the Advisory Board will be -- some are very active, many are largely for show and very . . . not -- but it's a good list.

Three of them have promised entries for Mormon Scholars Testify:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

Four of them have already provided entries for Mormon Scholars Testify:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/396/richard-lyman-bushman

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/484/james-e-faulconer

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/1904/terryl-l-givens

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/243/grant-hardy

One of them is on the editorial board of Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture, and another has just been published in Interpreter.

By the way, I was delighted to see Terryl Givens' letter to a doubter in Interpreter. It has a great tone.

[CASteinman]

I also thought you made a very good point that the millions donated to FARMS will now not be used for what might have been the donors original intended purpose. Given it's BYU and the church they might feel a little uncomfortable about raising that concern.

This would bother me to distraction.

[wenglund]

Where I have misread Dan?

You misread Dan's comment to have been in "poor judgement." Obviously. It wasn't. It was your judgement that was poor. Own it. Learn from it. And, grow.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[emarkp]

Your approach, diahman, would, if pushed to its logical conclusion, eliminate virtually all topical comedy, satire, and political cartoons. Seriously. And I mean very seriously. Ponderously, mind-numbingly seriously.

And now we know what DCP's vile behavior has been. You make comparisons. I'm sure the new NAMI regime will avoid such scurrilous behavior.

Sigh.

[Scott Lloyd]

What has gotten lost in this discussion is the fact that Daniel could not have been equating the Maxwell Institute with the Stalinist regime, because there has not yet been a basis for comparison. That is to say, the new MI mission statement has only just been formulated, and there has not yet been enough time pass for it to be implemented.

The only thing the Stalin reference did is illustrate the rather non-controversial point that not all institutions live up to what they say they are going to do.

[Daniel Peterson]

Exactly. I didn't think my point was controversial at all.

Another example, I suppose, of my "consistent and unapologetic implementation of poor judgment."

If only euthanasia were legal!

[ERayR]

Exactly. I didn't think my point was controversial at all.

Another example, I suppose, of my "consistent and unapologetic implementation of poor judgment."

If only euthanasia were legal!

But you must know somebody will find anything you say controversial. If you were to but note the sky was blue some would find the hidden meaning to be controversial.

[LoudmouthMormon]

You know an argument is lost when you start to hear statements like "Oh, I understand. I'm just looking out for the other guy who may not understand so well," followed by suggestions on how to communicate better next time.

[Mark Beesley]

. . . . this thread is still alive? . . . .

[ERayR]

. . . . this thread is still alive? . . . .

No but its not quite dead either. Maybe just mostly dead. .

[Mark Beesley]

I loved Elder Holland's talk. It was pretty much about focusing on the positive. I like that.

[Calm]

Got this in the mail today:

The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship is pleased to announce the Mormon Studies Review will resume as an annual publication on December 1, 2013. As a former subscriber, you will receive a complimentary copy of the Review along with information about how to renew your subscription.

We appreciate your past support of the Institute and we are confident that you will continue to benefit from the Mormon Studies Review. Ongoing news and updates about the Reviewand the Institute’s other initiatives is available on our new blog,

www.maxwellinstituteblog.org

.

You do not need to respond in order to receive your complimentary copy of the Review, but if your contact information needs to be updated or you have further questions, email us at

maxwell_institute@byu.edu

or call 800-327-6715.

All the best,

M. Gerald Bradford

Executive Director

Edited April 8, 2013 by calmoriah

[Daniel Peterson]

LOL. I don't believe that I received that.

Maybe I don't count as a former subscriber?

Incidentally, diahman suggested the other day, in this thread, that I have some sort of bizarre, judgment-warping fixation on an us-vs.-them war mentality, in which I see enemies all around me.

I couldn't help but think, in that light, that I must have written the remarks that Elder Perry delivered on Sunday morning, which employed the very kind of combat imagery that diahman sees as my signature characteristic.

And was it during the priesthood session on Saturday night that everybody stood to sing my song?

1. Hope of Israel, Zion’s army,

Children of the promised day,

See, the Chieftain signals onward,

And the battle’s in array!

[Chorus]

Hope of Israel, rise in might

With the sword of truth and right;

Sound the war-cry, “Watch and pray!”

Vanquish ev’ry foe today.

2. See the foe in countless numbers,

Marshaled in the ranks of sin.

Hope of Israel, on to battle;

Now the vict’ry we must win!

3. Strike for Zion, down with error;

Flash the sword above the foe!

Ev’ry stroke disarms a foeman;

Ev’ry step we conq’ring go.

4. Soon the battle will be over;

Ev’ry foe of truth be down.

Onward, onward, youth of Zion;

Thy reward the victor’s crown.

I wrote it back about the turn of the last century, to a tune by my friend William Clayton, under the pen name of "Joseph W. Townsend."

.

Edited April 9, 2013 by Daniel Peterson

[David T]

NAMIRS unites with Salt Press, and announces new titles., and adds its four founders to an editorial advisory board (Robert Couch, Adam Miller, Joseph Spencer, Jenny Webb) - awesome!

I've read everything currently presented from Salt Press. I have been highly, highly impressed. Joseph Spencer's work, specifically, has had a major impact on my approach to and appreciation for the Book of Mormon in the past year.

Edited April 9, 2013 by David T

[morgan.deane]

NAMIRS unites with Salt Press, and announces new titles., and adds its four founders to an editorial advisory board (Robert Couch, Adam Miller, Joseph Spencer, Jenny Webb) - awesome!

I've read everything currently presented from Salt Press. I have been highly, highly impressed. Joseph Spencer's work, specifically, has had a major impact on my approach to and appreciation for the Book of Mormon in the past year.

"The BoM Made Harder" looks great. Every time I saw the "made easier" series I thought about using that title for my manuscript. So I'm glad I'm not the only one annoyed with the implications of making scriptures "easier."

[morgan.deane]

"The BoM Made Harder" looks great. Every time I saw the "made easier" series I thought about using that title for my manuscript. So I'm glad I'm not the only one annoyed with the implications of making scriptures "easier."

nvm.

Edited April 9, 2013 by morgan.deane

[Scott Lloyd]

"The BoM Made Harder" looks great. Every time I saw the "made easier" series I thought about using that title for my manuscript. So I'm glad I'm not the only one annoyed with the implications of making scriptures "easier."

I'm not a fan of the "made easier" title either.

But the "made harder" appellation, intended or not, seems to convey a tone of snarkiness that I also find off-putting. Perhaps, since it is not yet published, there is still time to change it to something that better fits what I have no doubt will be fine work.

Edited April 9, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[volgadon]

I'm not a fan of the "made easier" title either.

But the "made harder" appellation, intended or not, seems to convey a tone of snarkiness that I also find off-putting. Perhaps, since it is not yet published, there is still time to change it to something that better fits what I have no doubt will be fine work.

They shouldn't change a thing with the title, it is brilliant.

[David T]

They shouldn't change a thing with the title, it is brilliant.

Agreed. I love it. It's a phrase I've been using myself for a while.

[Daniel Peterson]

NAMIRS unites with Salt Press, and announces new titles., and adds its four founders to an editorial advisory board (Robert Couch, Adam Miller, Joseph Spencer, Jenny Webb) - awesome!

I've read everything currently presented from Salt Press. I have been highly, highly impressed. Joseph Spencer's work, specifically, has had a major impact on my approach to and appreciation for the Book of Mormon in the past year.

Salt Press has done some interesting and valuable things. I was on their advisory board until it was dissolved last night.

Which, again, makes me wonder precisely why I needed to be expelled from the Maxwell Institute so that it could do this kind of work.

Oh well. There are mysteries that I don't expect to understand until the next life, and this may be one of them.

But, as the saying goes, "Enough about me. What do you think about me?"