I appear to have missed this, but Rodney Meldrum has helpfully informed all interested parties that Maxwell Institute has "fired" the main proponents of the LGT:
FIRM wrote:BYU’s Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship (MI) made a profound change in direction when, on Thursday, June 14th, 2012, Executive Director M. Gerald Bradford fired Daniel C. Peterson, a founder of FARMS (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) and long time advocate of Mesoamerican theories, along with his editorial staff. Director Bradford cited a desire to “take the Review (Mormon Studies Review, formerly FARMS Review) in a different direction.” The “shake-up” involves several of the most ardent critics of the Heartland Model Geography research.
This is yet more evidence in favor of Dean Robbers's claim that the LGT has effectively been "abandoned" by the Mopologetic hard-liners. Then again, I wonder if we might read this development as indication that LGT was being "suppressed" from the inside? In any case, you can practically sense the Meldrum camp's jubilation over these developments.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
I think if you had to point to one thing that spelled the doom for the LGT, it would have to be those ridiculous articles in the D-News by Michael Ash.
That and the fact that it was a silly theory and smacked of desperation.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Doctor Scratch wrote:I appear to have missed this, but Rodney Meldrum has helpfully informed all interested parties that Maxwell Institute has "fired" the main proponents of the LGT:
FIRM wrote:BYU’s Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship (MI) made a profound change in direction when, on Thursday, June 14th, 2012, Executive Director M. Gerald Bradford fired Daniel C. Peterson, a founder of FARMS (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) and long time advocate of Mesoamerican theories, along with his editorial staff. Director Bradford cited a desire to “take the Review (Mormon Studies Review, formerly FARMS Review) in a different direction.” The “shake-up” involves several of the most ardent critics of the Heartland Model Geography research.
This is yet more evidence in favor of Dean Robbers's claim that the LGT has effectively been "abandoned" by the Mopologetic hard-liners. Then again, I wonder if we might read this development as indication that LGT was being "suppressed" from the inside? In any case, you can practically sense the Meldrum camp's jubilation over these developments.
Well, your jubilation -- also known as Schadenfreude -- every time those you hate encounter any setback at all, is likewise palpable.
I realise that as an anti-Mormon, you'd love the so-called "heartland" model to become the accepted interpretation of Book of Mormon geography; it's such an easy target, after all.
But I'm afraid it's all wishful thinking on your part, as well as on Meldrum's.
Pahoran wrote:I realise that as an anti-Mormon, you'd love the so-called "heartland" model to become the accepted interpretation of Book of Mormon geography; it's such an easy target, after all.
It's more genuinely Mormon. Meldrum has that on his side along with millions of other Mormons.
Why does Meldrum fight so hard for it... unless he too is an anti-Mormon!!!
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Just a point of order, Doctor Scratch: there is no "the" LGT. There are several limited geography theories that claim different areas in Mesoamerica were the location of the Book of Mormon events.
The Dude wrote:It's more genuinely Mormon. Meldrum has that on his side along with millions of other Mormons.
Why does Meldrum fight so hard for it... unless he too is an anti-Mormon!!!
It is not like there is any serious difference between the Heartland model and LGT, outside of a collection of dedicated BYU professors and other LDS scholars to lend their effort to its support. After all, a tiny community that writes of itself in epic, overblown terms, which one should not expect to find because of its submersion in the surrounding civilization, could have easily taken place elsewhere.
Admittedly, I am tired of quasi-Mesoamerican representations of Book of Mormon figures and buildings. Blech.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Pahoran wrote: I realise that as an anti-Mormon, you'd love the so-called "heartland" model to become the accepted interpretation of Book of Mormon geography; it's such an easy target, after all.
But I'm afraid it's all wishful thinking on your part, as well as on Meldrum's.
Good evening, Pahoran.
I'm not sure where you have been, but it doesn't appear it was in the LDS Church. The "heartland" model is the accepted interpretation of the Book of Mormon geography. The vast majority of LDS believe in the "heartland" model. If you don't believe me, ask some members of your Ward next Sunday.
It's not wishful thinking, it's reality.
Very truly yours,
Wang
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Pahoran wrote:I realise that as an anti-Mormon, you'd love the so-called "heartland" model to become the accepted interpretation of Book of Mormon geography; it's such an easy target, after all.
But I'm afraid it's all wishful thinking on your part, as well as on Meldrum's.
Good evening, Pahoran.
I'm not sure where you have been, but it doesn't appear it was in the LDS Church. The "heartland" model is the accepted interpretation of the Book of Mormon geography. The vast majority of LDS believe in the "heartland" model. If you don't believe me, ask some members of your Ward next Sunday.
It's not wishful thinking, it's reality.
Very truly yours,
Wang
Well Mister Chung, I don't know where you've been; but some form of Mesoamerican LGT has been the dominant view in LDS scholarly circles since 1950 at the latest.
The most common "folklore" view has always been the "hemispheric" model. The silly, parochial, US-centric "Heartland" model is a recent innovation.
Why don't you try talking to some real believing Mormons sometime?
Pahoran wrote:Well Mister Chung, I don't know where you've been; but some form of Mesoamerican LGT has been the dominant view in LDS scholarly circles since 1950 at the latest.
The most common "folklore" view has always been the "hemispheric" model. The silly, parochial, US-centric "Heartland" model is a recent innovation.
Why don't you try talking to some real believing Mormons sometime?
Regards, Pahoran
Hello Pahoran,
I think even you would heartily admit that "scholarly circles" do not the Church membership make.
Also, I sincerely hope you are joking when you say that the "US=centric Heartland model" is a "recent innovation". Because if you are serious, then I will smile and slowly back away until I reach the door and then run for my life to escape the crazy.
Very truly yours,
Wang
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."