My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

[_Stem]

Great episode, Brian and RFM. It was well worth the time, I put into it. I've always liked Hauglid. Seems like a good genuine fellow. I worked for the church and know what it's like to try and navigate work and faith questioning. I think I get at least a little bit how that might have been for him.

And if Gee is half the weenie he comes off to be in this, well...I mean he's got some problems.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Absolutely epic! This is clearly one of the most important things that has happened so far in the realm of Mopologetics this year. This may be the single greatest summary of John Gee's "career" as the main Book of Abraham apologist that we've ever seen. Hauglid's discussion, in which he describes himself as something of a "protege" of what he calls "The Two Johns" (Welch and Gee), is revelatory in a number of places. To my mind, these were the highlights of this long, but worthwhile podcast:

--Hauglid reveals that he was pressured by "The Two Johns" to do dishonest scholarship. This falls into line with other things we've heard from Blair Hodges, Kerry Shirts, and (if I'm not mistaken--but don't quote me on this) David Bokovoy, all of whom have described being essentially "coerced" into adding more Mopologetic material into their FARMS/MI-related publications.

--Hauglid's discussion of the process of producing the Church's essay on the Book of Abraham is awesome. There is so much secrecy and sort of "skullduggery" at work here, with a shadowy GA overseeing the whole thing.

--The discussion about Gee, and his mindset and approach to doing Mopologetics, was fascinating. Here, Gee is revealed to be quite a cunning and manipulative person: someone willing to throw scholarly ethics out the window in order to defend the Church. I found it especially interesting that Hauglid described Gee as growing gradually more cold and distant, despite the fact that he was basically in a kind of "mentoring" relationship with Hauglid. There was apparently an "inner circle" of Mopologists (and I'm sure it's all the usual suspects: Peterson, Gee, Midgley, Hamblin, Roper, and so on, though you always wonder about the more peripheral figures....) who were plotting things behind the scenes--i.e., behind Gerald Bradford's back, and in some cases, behind the Brethren's backs. Gee is described as being into "subtleties" and "subterfuge," which rings true with other evidence we've observed.

--There have been people who've been concerned / suspicious that the Mopologist truly are targeting and trying to do harm to other people's careers, relationships, and Church membership. The Murphy incident is an obvious example, though there have been others. Hauglid here confirms that this is true, and that the Mopologists have indeed targeting people with the goal of ruining them, and he cites his Book of Abraham conflicts--and his getting summoned to his bishop's office--as yet another example of this. (I wouldn't be surprised if this was Midgley, who, frankly, often seems like the ringleader for this sort of behavior.)

--I laughed out loud at Hauglid's discussion of Mopologetic "peer review": a description that matches every single other "insider" description that I've ever seen. Basically, it's a corrupt, nepotistic "inside job" that is more about reaffirming the "inner circle'"s orthodoxy than about legitimate scholarship.

--Perhaps the best revelation: Hauglid says that Gee and Peterson were admonished by a General Authority over their 'Interpreter' criticisms of the JSP!! LOL! I mean, duh: this is a Church-sponsored production. Did they really think that they could lay into it over "sour grapes" with their usual, uh, "zeal"?

--The icing on the cake is that Hauglid says that Gee was paid by the Church to do a peer review of the book! So, he gets paid and then turns around and writes this vicious "hit piece" for "Interpreter"! Well, you sort of have to admire hubris on that scale--the sheer arrogance of it.

I wonder which GA it was that summoned DCP into "the Principal's Office"? This, of course, is not the first time I've been told that the Mopologists have been reprimanded by the General Authorities. A number of others have said the same thing, including some rather reliable "informants."

In any case, many thanks to Prof. Hauglid and Consig for a revelatory and historic interview! I'm guessing that the Mopologists are reeling over this, and are very likely plotting a revenge of some kind.

[_Simon Southerton]

I noted that Hauglid was quite ready to answer any and all questions RFM was going to put to him. Hauglid was ready but he was in effect, on many technical issues, let off the hook because RFM was a gentleman and quite respectful to his guest. Hauglid must have appreciated that. RFM could have tossed a number of difficult questions in Hauglid's face -- especially pertaining to the Facsimiles and I have to think that Hauglid was ready to answer whatever was going to come his way.

Perhaps there will be a second interview sometime in the future? Time will tell.

I confess that I'm disappointed that some of my questions weren't asked.

Shulem, this is exactly how I felt. RFM went to a lot of trouble to gather tough questions from his many fans and he asked virtually NONE of them. I don't think Brian is at that stage yet. There can be little doubt it was prearranged that RFM would ask soft ball questions Brian was ready for. He would then give Brian an opportunity to "address" as many of the "tougher" questions he was comfortable with answering.

[_I have a question]

--Hauglid's discussion of the process of producing the Church's essay on the Book of Abraham is awesome. There is so much secrecy and sort of "skullduggery" at work here, with a shadowy GA overseeing the whole thing.

And...

For the record, I no longer hold the views that have been quoted from my 2010 book in these videos. I have moved on from my days as an “outrageous” apologist. In fact, I’m no longer interested or involved in apologetics in any way. I wholeheartedly agree with Dan‘s excellent assessment of the Abraham/Egyptian documents in these videos. I now reject a missing Abraham manuscript. I agree that two of the Abraham manuscripts were simultaneously dictated. I agree that the Egyptian papers were used to produce the Book of Abraham. I agree that only Abr. 1:1-2:18 were produced in 1835 and that Abr. 2:19-5:21 were produced in Nauvoo. And on and on. I no longer agree with Gee or Mulhestein. I find their apologetic “scholarship” on the Book of Abraham abhorrent. One can find that I’ve changed my mind in my recent and forthcoming publications. The most recent JSP Revelations and Translation vol. 4, The Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts (now on the shelves) is much more open to Dan’s thinking on the origin of the Book of Abraham. My friend Brent Metcalfe can attest to my transformative journey.

https://proveallthingsholdfasttogood.wo ... e-journey/

This might be a stretch. But the way I'm reading this, Hauglid was involved in the production of the Book Of Abraham essay which includes...

It is likely futile to assess Joseph’s ability to translate papyri when we now have only a fraction of the papyri he had in his possession. Eyewitnesses spoke of “a long roll” or multiple “rolls” of papyrus.11 Since only fragments survive, it is likely that much of the papyri accessible to Joseph when he translated the book of Abraham is not among these fragments.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng

...but is now recanting his support for, and belief in, some of what it says. Have I got that right? Is he just stopping short of calling the essay dishonest*?

*I'm using the Church's own definition of Honesty found here

[_moksha]

Two Prime Issues at the 2-hour mark of this Podcast:

1. Honesty is the best policy for the long term sake of everyone concerned with the Church.

2. Dishonesty is the best policy in order to retain members and make the job of apologists easier by not having to explain so much.

[_moksha]

Finished this podcast and realized this was a five-alarm must view at Apologist Central. I suspect there was a clamoring as to which one got to report Brian Hauglid to the Inquisition Committee. Did they go with seniority or expertise in Egyptology?

[_Simon Southerton]

Let’s imagine I am a CES educator who is starting to reject the Church's Book of Abraham apologetics. I don’t agree that disbelieving in the Church’s BS apologetics regarding the Book of Abraham should be grounds for firing, excommunication, or any negative consequence. Unfortunately the Church does not agree. Am I obligated to suffer the consequences of their messed up priorities? I pay my tithing too. I put all my eggs in the basket of being a CES educator. Now what do I do? I still find the subject interesting. I can still do my job. Why should anyone feel I am obliged to tell them what they need to hear to decide to leave the Church? Is there no room for me to go through my process and fulfil my obligations to my family?

It's a hopeless case isn't it? Here's to another few decades of Guck Fee et al. lying for the Lord and getting away with it.

[_Shulem]

Shulem, this is exactly how I felt. RFM went to a lot of trouble to gather tough questions from his many fans and he asked virtually NONE of them. I don't think Brian is at that stage yet. There can be little doubt it was prearranged that RFM would ask soft ball questions Brian was ready for. He would then give Brian an opportunity to "address" as many of the "tougher" questions he was comfortable with answering.

Well, let's see what RFM says when he checks in. Is that true, RFM? Did you only have a list of softball questions ready to pitch and avoid the hard questions? You know quite well, there are some very hard (no pun intended) questions you could have asked that show that Smith had absolutely no idea what he had his hands on (no pun intended) as he dressed down the Facsimiles for his uninspired and false Egyptological Explanations.

Poor, pitiful, John Gee. Can you imagine throwing hardballs at him during an interview? I know that I could put him in between a rock and a hard place. Squeeze the little bastard Egyptologist so hard he cracks and falls out of his chair. Imagine Shulem kicking his ass. And I would. I could. Oh my God, he'd probably go into cardiac arrest.

[_Kishkumen]

It's a hopeless case isn't it? Here's to another few decades of Guck Fee et al. lying for the Lord and getting away with it.

One thing I am taking away from the current climate in the world is that one will always be able to find a group of people who will believe something in the face of facts that clearly contradict their beliefs. White supremacism. Flat earth. You name it. Some people will believe whatever they want, and there will always be those talented people who, for one reason or another, are willing to support them in their fantasies. Look at Gee himself. Must have a pretty high IQ. Trained at one of the very best universities in the world. Knows he is massaging the evidence in order to reach conclusions others would find dubious at best. And yet, there he is, a true believer. He is so committed that he feels duty-bound to double down on flimsy theories and even ones that fly in the face of the totality of the known evidence.

What we can be sure is that there are going to be people who with lie for their own reasons long after Gee et al. are feeding the roses. In fact, I and many of my fellow citizens are living in a country that is being piloted by people who are lying for their own reasons. Yeah, it sucks.

[_Shulem]

I'm guessing that the Mopologists are reeling over this, and are very likely plotting a revenge of some kind.

Which is something Christians don't do. No turning of the cheek by them. Revenge and spite is what's in their hearts. By their fruits we know them for what and they really are. Spoiled and rotten want-to-be, in name only -- fake Christians.