https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... -research/“Interpreter book review” wrote: Critique
I really liked all 184 pages of Book of Mormon Studies: An Introduction and Guide. The four authors have gone to extraordinary lengths to remain fair and even-handed in their treatment of twentieth-century scholars and scholarship while at the same time promoting their twenty-first-century agenda.
While the authors do try to be scrupulously fair, the deck is clearly and myopically stacked in favor of what they frame as the twenty-first-century view.
An example is the uneven representation of the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (which one of the authors, Joseph M. Spencer, edits) and Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship.
There are thirty references from the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies in the appendix, but only a single, must-read reference from the Interpreter, David M. Belnap’s summary essay entitled, “The Inclusive, Anti- Discrimination Message of the Book of Mormon,” a 175-page article that advances the chapter-five agenda in Book of Mormon Studies.
Finally, the description of Interpreter in Book of Mormon Studies is far from kind.
The journal is positioned in the book as a backward-looking publication in which FARMS retreads who have nothing new to say publish marginally relevant historicity papers. In one place, they even get the name of the journal wrong, calling it the Mormon Interpreter (p. 40). Here is what Book of Mormon Studies has to say about Interpreter:
The reason, then, for privileging the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies over the Interpreter in Book of Mormon Studies is that the former is avant garde and the latter is backward-looking.Theory/Approach: The Book of Mormon is an ancient document, as will be demonstrated through comparative study of the text and ancient Near Eastern documents and sources. Major Figures/Movements: High Nibley and the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies in the twentieth century; scholars publishing in the Interpreter in the twenty-first century. (p. 41)
As publications in the Mormon Interpreter (later renamed Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship) show, there nevertheless remains much work to do on the historical origins of the Book of Mormon. (p. 40)
The Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship publishes a good deal of scholarship on the Book of Mormon, most of it in the vein of traditional twentieth-century scholarship. (p. 153)
This privileging of the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies does not seem to be warranted by impact on the discipline of Book of Mormon studies, as measured by a citation analysis. Articles in Interpreter are likely to be cited twice as often as articles appearing in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies.
I believe that the influence of the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies will continue to wane, because it is now locked behind a paywall and is not freely available to the three target audiences described at the beginning of Book of Mormon Studies. This same analysis suggests a bright, impactful future for Interpreter.
The articles on Interpreter may be backwards looking reheated leftovers, but at least they’re not behind a paywall!

I wonder if Dan even read this article on his flight back from Egypt before copy-pasting it to his blog.