Transhumanism ramps up at Mormon Interpreter

[_Gadianton]

Friends, it's a great honor to report to you this evening that the Mormon Interpreter has inched ahead slightly in its goal to become a respectable scholarly journal by printing an article that goes to the throat of some of senior-tier apologist Greg L. Smith's most important work.

Not long ago, as you may recall, by directive of the Mopologist doctrine of the sanctified preemptive strike, the Mopologists ordered and executed a hit against the peace-loving community of Mormon Transhumanists. This community of LDS believers who have every bit a right to call themselves disciples of Jesus Christ and members of his restored church as the apologists, had offended nobody, just as Jesus would have asked of them, and simply sought to live their own "positive beliefs" in peace. But the apologists were offended in advance, perhaps visualizing themselves in heated debate with the transhumanists and unable to muscle their fellow believers into thinking the way they do, and so in a fury, sent their most experienced special forces man in for the invasion.

But today, just weeks later, in a stunning reversal, the Interpreter scoffs at the sacrifice Smith made for their cause by celebrating a Transhumanist position as its coveted Friday afternoon offering. Smith is well within his right to take umbrage over this divisive move by the Interpreter leadership, and if he were to go the way of a growing body of Mopologist dissidents as articulated by Bishop Chung and others, it would be understandable.

Recall, from the attack on Transhumanism, Smith laid down the law of Peterson-inspired magical thinking, charging that the Transhumanists are wrong to see "material objects" such as the Liahona as "technology" rather than Godly miracles. The Mopologists, true to their 7-day Earth impulses, vocalized their toe of fundamentalism through Smith as he wrote:

True, Lehi and family were guided by the compass-like Liahona in their journey (2b), but here again Lehi did not design the device, nor did technocrats help forge it. Instead, it appeared fully-formed outside Lehi’s tent. (Alma even insists that its construction was beyond any human ability; see Alma 37:39.) Despite being a material object (and thus “technology” by some definitions) it did not work according to any physical principles or scientific laws known to Lehi or us

But today's rising young scholar newly published by the Interpreter, scoffs at this outdated thinking:

While the appearance of the Liahona has received no scholarly treatment to my knowledge, anecdotal origin theories typically ascribe the placement of the Liahona at Lehi’s tent door to some form of heavenly messenger. Some individuals have gone as far as to suggest the instrument was both forged and placed at the tent door by God himself.

LOL! What a blow to Smith to dismiss his "fully-formed and outside tent" theory as unscholarly! Notice the juxtaposition of his considered wording "scholarly treatment" and "some individuals" (people with opinions who aren't scholars) who "go as far as to suggest the instrument was both forged and placed at the tent door by God himself" -- e.g., who advance the very position Smith did, at the bidding of his Creationist masters!

Gervais has reasoned explations such as:

Virtually every other use of the [Page 212]expression [prepared by the hand of the Lord] in the Book of Mormon describes a situation, circumstance, or event orchestrated by God rather than describing something physically performed by God himself

Nephi makes no claim that the creation, appearance, or function of the device was a display of God’s power, but instead seems to emphasize the timing of the Liahona’s appearance as the true miracle

As several of Ishmael’s daughters married several of Lehi’s sons, it is plausible that Ishmael would have given a collective dowry to Lehi, the father of the grooms, to distribute among the newly formed households. The giving of a dowry in the desert, away from society, would have severely limited the form in which the dowry could be given... An astrolabe is precisely such an instrument.

Remarkable!

It was a “miracle” like “many other miracles wrought by the power of God”.

Indeed. According to the latest accepted scholarship by the Interpreter, which fully displaces Smith to accept the Transhumanist position, it's a miracle in the same way a comforting song suddenly plays at a time when a person is in need of comforting.

A "small thing" the Liahona was -- just an ordinary, human designed astrolabe. A device that allowed mankind to advance itself in a non-magical way, just as the Transhumanists teach.

[_Symmachus]

An excellent summary of this brewing conflict, Dean Robbers. If only the old FARMS Review had exercised such facility and concision in writing their reviews as you display here in writing yours—how many pleasant groves might still be with us.

I note also that you display much generosity in not pointing out the fact that Gervais and Joyce failed to hyphenate the name of the Lord's church properly—but what would you expect from an apostate publication with the slur "Mormon" in its subtitle?

[_Tom]

I have only a moment or two to respond. I just returned from seeing an achingly acted, exhaustively staged, rapturously sung, majestically choreographed, boldly directed, smartly produced, and gratuitously bloody musical adaptation of William Golding's Lord of the Flies, and I'm now off to take in a week-long Keanu Reeves film festival in Ephraim in a few minutes (my favorite Reeves film is Johnny Mnemonic).

Another trenchant and witty review, Dean Robbers. I sense some palpable spiritual indigestion from regular SEN readers regarding this latest piece (see the comments here). Perhaps Brother Wyatt took advantage of Dr. Peterson's absence last week (taking in a performance of the musical version of The Scarlet Pimpernel) by green-lighting this one on his own and evading the normal scientific peer review conducted by Drs. Smith and Midgley.

In related news, I have it on good authority that Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture will be renamed before year's end. Dr. Midgley has made the strong suggestion of renaming the journal Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith. As an ex-officio member of Interpreter's absolutely independent article-review committee, I recommend Interpreter: A Journal of Faithful Latter-day Saint Disciple Scholarship or Interpreter: Latter-day Saint Mormon Scholars Testify or Interpreter: Bracketing Secular Scholarship and Ideologies.

[_Gadianton]

Tom, thanks for sharing your valuable time. I think this suggestion is highly likely "Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith".

It does look like some folks in the comment section aren't ready for Transhumanism yet.

[_Tom]

Tom, thanks for sharing your valuable time. I think this suggestion is highly likely "Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith".

It does look like some folks in the comment section aren't ready for Transhumanism yet.

I just exited from a screening of the classic film Youngblood (starring a young Keanu Reeves), and I have a few minutes before I go out to dinner with some long-time friends. Yes, Dr. Midgley’s recommendation should carry considerable weight with Dr. Peterson, who, as chair, will make the final decision.

By the way, I trust that you’re closely following developments regarding Rodney Meldrum’s bestselling Annotated Book of Mormon. The first printing of 5,000 copies sold out in record time, and I expect the second printing to do the same. Book of Mormon Central has grown so concerned about the salvation of the buyers of this 600-page book that it has issued an unprecedented executive summary/spiritual warning. I am partial to the Heartland model, but I must admit that the executive summary’s section exposing errors in attribution or image credits (pp. 7-8) is truly devastating.

[_Lemmie]

By the way, I trust that you’re closely following developments regarding Rodney Meldrum’s bestselling Annotated Book of Mormon. The first printing of 5,000 copies sold out in record time, and I expect the second printing to do the same. Book of Mormon Central has grown so concerned about the salvation of the buyers of this 600-page book that it has issued an unprecedented executive summary/spiritual warning. I am partial to the Heartland model, but I must admit that the executive summary’s section exposing errors in attribution or image credits (pp. 7-8) is truly devastating.

wow, they need to be careful. That executive summary reads like the CES letter.

Re the lack of sources problem they pointed out, maybe Dan Peterson can explain to them that getting caught failing to attribute materials to the proper copyright holder doesn't have to be a problem. They can follow his lead and just post somewhere online that they did it on purpose and will add in the sources if (and only if) readers catch the plagiarism.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

I have only a moment or two to respond. I just returned from seeing an achingly acted, exhaustively staged, rapturously sung, majestically choreographed, boldly directed, smartly produced, and gratuitously bloody musical adaptation of William Golding's Lord of the Flies, and I'm now off to take in a week-long Keanu Reeves film festival in Ephraim in a few minutes (my favorite Reeves film is Johnny Mnemonic).

Oh my GAWD! I haven't laughed this hard in a long time. Brilliant!

[_Gadianton]

Thanks Tom. No, the first I heard of this important development was in the link above where Midgley is in meltdown mode over Meldrum and the Heartland model. I'm in shock, to be honest. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. Once the Mopologists published their own "Critical Text" Book of Mormon that teaches Mopologetics, why shouldn't the Heartland folks have their own Book of Mormon too? I wonder what Nelson is going to do about this situation. No plays and pageants but people can just print their own Book of Mormon?

Do you know what Letter VII is all about? This mysterious letter is referenced several times but its website is down.

ETA: i see it now. L7 is proof that there is only 1 hill Cummorah, as Occam's razor says.

[_Chap]

As several of Ishmael’s daughters married several of Lehi’s sons, it is plausible that Ishmael would have given a collective dowry to Lehi, the father of the grooms, to distribute among the newly formed households. The giving of a dowry in the desert, away from society, would have severely limited the form in which the dowry could be given... An astrolabe is precisely such an instrument.

My emphasis.

Just one problem there. Lehi was supposedly active c. 600 BC, was he not?

However, I do not think that any scholar thinks that the device known as an astrolabe was known in any form much before the time of Hipparchus c. 150 BC. 600 BC is entirely implausible.

[Guest]

Thanks Tom. No, the first I heard of this important development was in the link above where Midgley is in meltdown mode over Meldrum and the Heartland model. I'm in shock, to be honest. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. Once the Mopologists published their own "Critical Text" Book of Mormon that teaches Mopologetics, why shouldn't the Heartland folks have their own Book of Mormon too? I wonder what Nelson is going to do about this situation. No plays and pageants but people can just print their own Book of Mormon?

Excellent points. The highly underrated Feeling Minnesota (starring K. Reeves, Vincent D'Onofrio, and Cameron Diaz) is scheduled to start any minute now, but while I stand in line for a large popcorn and a box of Milk Duds, I must note that another competitor has emerged in this exciting field. The Maxwell Institute is publishing a study edition of the Book of Mormon prepared by Dr. Grant Hardy, perhaps best known as the winner of the 2016 Sampson Avard Golden Scepter Award, in recognition of his grand watershed FairMormon address, "More Effective Apologetics." From the book description:

Together with Brigham Young University’s Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, the BYU Religious Studies Center, and Deseret Book, [Dr. Grant] Hardy is preparing the Maxwell Institute Study Edition of the Book of Mormon (MISE). The book was also made possible by funds generously provided by the Maxwell Institute’s Laura F. Willes Center for Book of Mormon Studies.

What’s new about this Study Edition?

The Maxwell Institute Study Edition will be the first edition ever to combine the Church’s current official version of the text (2013) with the results of Royal Skousen’s groundbreaking Book of Mormon Critical Text Project. To Hardy, Skousen has created “a corpus of textual analysis that will last for many generations to come”; his meticulous research of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon from its original and printer’s manuscripts up through its current English editions can “teach us how to read scripture both critically and faithfully.” Few readers, however, will have the time or patience to read through Skousen’s 4,000-plus pages of variant analysis. MISE’s footnotes draw directly on the Critical Text Project, directing readers to nearly 200 variants from the Book of Mormon’s original manuscript and about 200 from the printer’s manuscript that could make the current text more accurate or understandable. These variants are offered as suggested points for consideration rather than authoritative replacements of the Church’s authorized text.

Hardy also thoroughly revised the headings, paragraphing, punctuation, and poetic forms from the Reader’s Edition. MISE highlights original chapter divisions—which research suggests were part of the original text as it was revealed—to better acquaint today’s readers with how the text was deliberately constructed by its ancient authors and experienced by its nineteenth-century audience.

Observations from decades of LDS scholarship produced by FARMS, BYU Studies, the Religious Studies Center, the Maxwell Institute, and other scholars and students of the sacred text are distilled in MISE’s brief, thoughtfully considered footnotes. The main focus always remains, however, on the text itself—its wording, structure, and interconnections—allowing the scripture’s sacred message to be heard anew. The Book of Mormon’s narrative complexity and coherence—highlighted in this edition—offer some of the strongest evidences of its historicity and miraculous translation.
. . .

Perhaps the most significant difference between MISE and the Reader’s Edition is that the latter was expressly an academic work, designed for religiously neutral scholarship, while MISE is edited and presented from an explicit position of faith and is intended primarily for readers who regard the Book of Mormon as revealed scripture. Readers will come to know the ancient editors Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni much better as they encounter familiar words in a fresh format. The edition is designed to build and sustain faith by encouraging readers to enter into a deeper relationship with the sacred text, and with the God who preserved and revealed it.

I must highlight one particular sentence above: "Few readers . . . will have the time or patience to read through [Dr. Royal] Skousen’s 4,000-plus pages of variant analysis." Ouch.

It remains to be seen whether MISE will adopt the Heartland Theory, Limited Geography Theory, Malaysian Hypothesis, Mosiah-First Theory, Jarom-Last Theory, and/or the Ghost Committee Theory. Will it cite the Gospel Topics Essays? Will it draw on the scholarship published in Interpreter? Will it quote from any of Dr. Peterson's unpublished manuscripts? Will President Nelson attempt to suppress it?