Mormon scholarship, apologetics, and evangelical neglect: Losing the battle and not knowing it?

Trinity Journal, Fall 1998 by Mosser, Carl, Owen, Paul

The few evangelicals who are aware of Hugh Nibley often dismiss him as a fraud or pseudo-scholar. Those wanting quickly to dismiss his writings would do well to heed Madsen's warning:

Ill-wishing critics have suspected over the years that Nibley is wrenching his sources, hiding behind his footnotes, and reading into antique languages what no responsible scholar would ever read out. Unfortunately, few have the tools to do the checking.10

The bulk of Nibley's work has gone unchallenged by evangelicals despite the fact that he has been publishing relevant material since 1946. Nibley's attitude toward evangelicals? "We need more antiMormon books. They keep us on our toes."11

No doubt there are flaws in Nibley's work, but most countercultists do not have the tools to uncover them. Few have tried.l2 It is beyond the scope of this paper to critique Nibley's methodology or to describe the breadth of his apologetic.13 Whatever flaws may exist in his methodology, Nibley is a scholar of high caliber. Many of his more important essays first appeared in academic journals such as Revue de Qumran, Vigiliae Christianae, Church History, and the Jewish Quarterly Review.14 Nibley has also received praise from non-LDS scholars such as Jacob Neusner, James Charlesworth, Cyrus Gordon, Raphael Patai, and Jacob Milgrom.ls The former dean of the Harvard Divinity School, George MacRae, once lamented while hearing him lecture, "It is obscene for a man to know that much!"16 Nibley has not worked in a cloister. It is amazing that few evangelical scholars are aware of his work. In light of the respect Nibley has earned in the non-LDS scholarly world it is more amazing that counter-cultists can so glibly dismiss his work.

For many years Nibley may have been conservative Mormonism's only reputable scholar. However, due to Nibley's influence as a motivating professor, today there are many more. During the years Nibley taught at BYU, several LDS students followed his example by going on to earn the degrees necessary to gain a hearing in the academic community. For example, Stephen E. Robinson went on to Duke University to earn a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies under W. D. Davies and James Charlesworth.l7 Others went in different directions. S. Kent Brown took a doctorate from Brown University, focusing his research on the Nag Hammadi texts. C. Wilfred Griggs received a Ph.D. in ancient history from the University of California at Berkeley and is a specialist in early Egyptian Christianity.lA Under the supervision of David Noel Freedman and Frank Moore Cross, Kent P. Jackson took a doctorate in Near Eastern studies from the University of Michigan after completing a dissertation on the Ammonite language.l9 Avraham Gileadi wrote his Ph.D. dissertation on the literary structure of Isaiah at BYU, with R. K. Harrison serving as the primary reader.20 Daniel C. Peterson was awarded his doctorate in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures from UCLA. Stephen D. Ricks received a doctorate in Near Eastern Religions from the University of California at Berkeley and Graduate Theological Union under Jacob Milgrom.21 Donald W. Parry received his Ph.D. in Hebrew jointly from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the University of Utah. John Gee has recently completed a Ph.D. in Egyptology at Yale University. Many more examples of Mormon scholars with equal credentials could be listed. Currently another crop of traditional Mormon intellectuals, in part funded by FARMS's Hugh Nibley Fellowships, are earning advanced degrees from Oxford, Duke, Claremont, UCLA, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Catholic University of America, and elsewhere. Their fields of study are quite relevant: New Testament, Syriac, Early Christianity, Near Eastern languages and cultures. The significance of these facts is simple: Mormons have the training and skills to produce robust defenses of their faith.