To conclude my notes from SBL, I want to present the material I took down from the two “Latter-day Saints and the Bible” sessions that were held Monday and Tuesday mornings. Because I want to share my notes on these in greater detail, this will be divided into two posts.  The theme was the same for both sessions: the legacy of Hugh W. Nibley.  Most of the presentations from both sessions focused on the work of renowned LDS scholar and Brigham Young University professor Hugh Nibley and how his research has influenced the succeeding generation of LDS scholars and students.   There were some insightful presentations given and survival of Nibley’s legacy among current and future scholars seemed well assured.

Session 1

The first session was presided over by John Welch, BYU Professor of Law and religious scholar. I will present a summary of my notes from each of the speakers.  As always, I am responsible for the content of these notes — they may not reflect fully and/or accurately what the speakers actually said.

Click on the link below for my notes:

Margaret Barker, Old Testament Scholar and Co-Founder of the Temple Studies Group

Unfortunately, Margaret Barker was not able to attend the conference, so her paper was read by Gaye Strathearn of BYU. You can read the full text of Barker’s paper here:

“‘Christian Envy of the Temple’ Revisiting Nibley’s Landmark Paper After 50 Years”

—————————–

John F. Hall, BYU Professor of Classics and Ancient History — “When the Lights Went Out: Hugh Nibley on the Passing of the Primitive Church”

John Hall was a student of Hugh Nibley at BYU. Nibley taught much on early Christianity — he mined extensively the Patrilogia, early Christian literature.

Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity, published as one of the “Collected Works of Hugh Nibley”, was put together by Welch and Hall from what they learned in Nibley’s classes. Nibley had taught a class early on about the office of bishop in early Christianity.

Nibley was influenced greatly by Joseph Smith. He understood well the transformation of primitive church — “the apostasy.”

In The World and the Prophets, Nibley emphasized the difference between sophic and mantic knowledge — in ancient times, there was the understanding that knowledge must come from revelation.

In 2 Thess. 2:3, the Greek text speeks of an apostasia — the KJV translates this as “falling away.”

The Apostasy is usually defined as starting from the death of the Apostles and progressing to the time of Constantine. The negative influence of Greek Platonism is usually claimed as the main culprit – it is argued that the learned bishops were responsible for falling away. Nibley had a much deeper understanding regarding what happened. He argued that the philosophical movement was too late to have been the main cause. Apostasia should be understood to mean “to rebel.” Rebellion is set in a moment of time rather than over centuries. Nibley saw evidence for a time period in the 2nd century known as the “great gap” when this would have occurred.

In this period, Christian groups “fractionated” into multiple groups from one pristine Christianity. There was a notable 2nd century rejection of 1st century teachings and apostolic authority.  In the end, “Orthodox” Christianity triumphed over other factions.

The principle by which we can understand this process is “Dispensationism” — that there is an ongoing cycle in which the world experiences a period of revealed truth, then rejection of that truth, and then eventually a restoration of the revealed truth.

Margaret Barker has spoken of the rejection of First Temple truths, which were later to be restored in Christianity. Christianity was a new, second Israel — a new dispensation. Nibley’s thought puts early Christianity into this milieu.

The Christian historian Eusebius presents a view of Orthodox Christianity as a progressive development of doctrine from its simple beginnings to its full bloom in the 4th century. Bart Ehrman rejects this idea — he emphasizes the early doctrinal divisions in Christianity. Nibley would have seen this as evidence of the severance and fractionation in the 2nd century.

Nibley preceded by a half century these modern ideas.  He published his article ”Passing of the Primitive Church” in vol. 30 of the journal Church History, in 1961. He argued that Jesus himself insisted that the light would be taken away. Early Christian writers knew that this was happening.

Some of the evidences that Nibley brings up to demonstrate this:

1. Declarations of early Christians regarding what they knew was to happen

2. Their strange behavior in light of these expectations

3. Doubts and denials of later church leaders

Nibley rejects the argument used by the Orthodox Church that because it had divine authority it could make whatever changes were necessary. The earliest Christians knew that the Church was meant to fail and that their victory would be on the other side of the veil and at the Second Coming. The following early Christian ideas reflect this view:

1. Rejection motif — Christ said that his teachings would be received by only a few; the apostles would also be rejected and persecuted.

2. Fractionation (not Nibley’s term) — rise in divisions rose as doctrines were changed to try to accommodate the world.

3. Doctrines were to be changed — perversion of some and cessation of teaching other doctrines; beliefs seen as unacceptable to their neighbors were modified.

4. Refusal to reject changes in doctrine

5. No original expectation of church’s survival — there was only expectation of the end time — limited proselyting by early Christians

6. Public relations — the mission of the Church was to save from perishing those who had known Christ — no concern to make new converts –world’s worst public relations

7. Purpose of church — gather and save the faithful, not convert — no missionary organization

8. No societal involvement — no real estate holdings — letters to “sojourning church in…”

9. Erudition became substituted for inspiration — loss of spiritual gifts

10. Rhetorical efforts to explain away the church’s demise and support the idea of its survival — early Christians claim to be surprised by the survival of the church

The Great Gap — an ominous gap — the church that emerged afterwards was much different — a break in the continuity of the early Church. By noting recent research on these topics, we can see that Nibley’s work remains valid and fresh.

————————————-

Laurence Paul Hemming, Research Fellow at Lancaster University, Co-Founder of the Temple Studies Group (also a Catholic deacon) — “Hugh Nibley and Attestations of Missing Traditions: The Lost 40 Days”

There is a flair and wit to Nibley’s interpretation. Those new to his work find as much between the lines as in what he has to say.

Theology is reflection on the lived experience of faith — but we are rationalists to our core and want to explore the psychology of religion. We ask ourselves: “How does religion match up to what we know to be true?”  This is the trend today.

The law of prayer should determine the law of belief — what is prayed determines what is to be believed — what is to be believed is based in the apostolic teaching tranferred through rites.

Nibley was both liberated by his scholarship and limited by his assumptions.

Nibley’s paper on the 40 Day literature – Nibley notes that those who acknowledge the 40 day ministry are at a loss to explain it. The teachings were not meant to become popular — it is described as very secret — the last and highest revelation.

The apostles had information that we do not have — there are things that have been lost.  It was an unwritten tradition. Scholars claim that it must not have been of much importance.

There is evidence for a lost oral tradition — a tradition of understanding concerning Melchizedek that was neglected.

The idea that Christian liturgy came from the synagogue is not true — it comes from the temple. There are important relics of what is missing and lost.

It is interesting to note that what I know of LDS temple tradition is very similar to Orthodox liturgical traditions.

The “lived experience of faith” — an investigation of how we must fulfill our faith in God.

What is practiced through priesthood is temple worship. The temple liturgy is the ritual, sacramental life of Eden and approach to and indwelling of the Holy of Holies. Adam was promised that he would be a god — not right now but after many years — this is found in pseudepigraphical texts such as the Testament of Adam. Adam’s work in Eden is clearly the work of the temple — Adam was the first priest, in Eden.

When Adam fell, he fell to the level of the animal, but God allowed him to rise and stand on his feet and work to produce his bread.

I [L. Hemming] have learned to unlock the secrets of my own liturgy through my experiences with Latter-day Saints. Catholic liturgy is preserved as a practice, but not as doctrine — it is retained only as a set of rituals.

Lent, the succession of five Sundays before Easter, was meant to be a 40 day fast — but this is a para-liturgical tradition — a popular tradition attached to a 40-day idea. This was supposed to be a tradition of fasting before baptism.

The number 40 is repeated as a theme in Christianity. The key 40 day period commemorated is between the Sunday of Easter to the celebration of the Ascension. Recall the Book of the Cave of Treasures — the Church is identified with Eden — not the institution, but the ritual, the sacraments — this is when one is to learn how to be unified with Christ. Nibley was aware of the importance of this tradition. This is the preparation for Pentecost. We see in Psalm 68 the Lord enthroned on Sinai; a depiction of Yahweh in His temple. We can see here a ritual re-enactment of the meaning of the Creation.

We should also note the 40 days period between Christmas and the  feast of the presentation of Christ at the temple, Candlemas (Feb 2). On Epiphany, January 6,  we celebrate the visit of Magi, representing the epiphany/theophany/manifestation of Christ to the world.  Epiphany is associated with both the birth and the baptism of Jesus, and also the marriage at Cana. The baptism of Jesus is when he was declared to be the begotten Son of God.

In this 40 day period, we have Jesus taking upon himself the priesthood, being recognized as Son of God and as Melchizedek priest by the Magi. The Psalms (2, 110, etc.) are an essential part of this liturgy. Christ takes possession of Holy of Holies. This is likely key to understanding the 40 day ministry. Christianity is a temple tradition.

—————————–

Marco Frenschkowski, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz — “Hugh Nibley and German Biblical Exegesis”

(Unfortunately, my computer’s battery gave out during this presentation, so I had to continue with hand-written notes after missing parts from the middle-section– thus, my notes do not reflect Professor Frenchowski’s full paper)

He is a pastor of a mainstream Protestant Church in Germany and is the only one that he knows of that owns all of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley! He finds reading Nibley strangely rewording. Nibley is an important contributor to inter-religious dialogue and understanding. His errors does not reduce his ability to keep you spellbound.

He doesn’t believe in what Nibley thinks he is doing, but appreciates still what he does do.

For example, Nibley argues: Could a poor farm boy have developed such an amazing work as the Book of Mormon? The answer is yes. This causes us to reflect on all of the marvelous works of literature produced by young, unlearned boys (gives examples of this, and further examples of what Nibley tried to argue).

Nibley wants to convince us of the things he stands for, but foremost he himself wants to know.

We honor Nibley when we contradict him.

There is a danger of looking for evidence wherever it can be found. But then we should be better at looking, like Nibley, at the whole wide field of culture, language, and life behind the texts. Nibley shows that apologetics can be not only erudite but sophisticated and entertaining.  Nibley had no hidden agenda, but was very up-front in his writing. We can say that apologetics is always for the believers, to show them that their beliefs are rational.

Nibley succeeded in bringing Book of Mormon studies to the level of Biblical studies. Nibley knew even the obscure German scholars as well.

Concerning the Book of Mormon, Moses, and Abraham — he (Frenchowski) compares these to other 19th century religious inventions, such as Acts 29, the Book of Jasher, and others. These are modern apocrypha that are comparable to Joseph Smith’s writings, although there are differences.

While we recognize that Nibley had shortcomings, we also recognize that so do we.