Having resigned from his latest attempt at playing "scholar," Willliam Hamblin is lashing out at his vast array of perceived enemies laying siege against him--including those at RfM and behind the Zion Curtain itself.
Lordy, is there no help for the whiner's son?
Hamblin has now abruptly quit serving as LDS-apologist sidekick/exective editor for BYU prof Daniel C. Peterson's “Interpreter” outfit (Peterson is the "Interpreter's" chairman of the board; see:
http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/board/).
Hamblin is busily blaming Mormon apostates, so-called Mormon haters, BYU administrators, Maxwell Institute directors and insidious unnamed fake-faced friends for:
-- treating him badly,
--slandering him,
--attacking his scholarship,
--delaying his overdue promotions,
--giving him poor performancce reviews,
--denying him a decent living wage,
--cramping his style and, thus,
--forcing him, he says, to throw in the towel.
That's quite a list of grievances for someone cheerfully doing the Lord's work.
--About his ex-Mormon and Mormon-hating critics, Hamblin complains:
“I’m tired of the relentless torrent of abuse from anti-Mormons and apostates, including them sending anonymous slanderous email accusations to university administrators.”
--As to the Maxwell Institute (formerly FARMS), Hamblin moans:
“I edit and publish with 'Interpreter.' BYU administrators inform me that I should publish in other venues. . . . The result . . . is that if I publish with FARMS or 'Interpreter,' I am considered to have low productivity because publications count as scholarly only if published outside the BYU bubble.”
--Hamblin then goes on to attack BYU administrators along with those who run Maxwell/FARMS:
“The directors of the Maxwell Institute complained to the administration about my public criticisms of their new policies. The administration, without giving me a chance to see or respond to those complaints, told me to stop criticizing the Maxwell Institute’s new direction. The fact that I’ve published with FARMS in the past has directly led to delayed promotion and sub-cost of living pay raises. I am tired of receiving poor evaluations on my scholarship because publishing with FARMS and now 'Interpreter' is considered unscholarly by BYU."
--Hamblin notes how devoted and successful he has been but, alas, how unappreciated he has become, declaring:
"I love research and writing. But I literally hate the bureaucratic and editing work required to run 'Interpreter.' I’ve spent a great deal of my free time for six months trying to get 'Interpreter' up and running. I think it is firmly established and viable now. Someone else can take it from here on out."
--Regarding his unnamed traiterous friends, Hamblin dramatizes:
“A person I thought was a friend recently decided to describe me (indirectly) as an apologetic hack instead of a real scholar. (This, by the way, has been the fundamental, most insidious, and perpetual slander of apostates–that a believing LDS scholar don’t do real scholarship. It is also, a classic example of ad hominem). It’s rather depressing when your friends desert you.”
--Stomping out, Hamblin says in a heave-ho hollerin' huff:
“It’s clearly time to move on. I will have nothing more to say on these matters, and will not be taking phone calls, answering emails or posting comments on the subject. (Sorry, I need a break).”
(“Why I’m Resigning from 'Interpreter,'” by William Hamblin, 2 March 2013, on “Mormon Scriptural Explorations: Exploring the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price,” at:
http://mormonscriptureexplorations.wordpress.com/2013/03/02/why-im-resigning-from-interpreter/)
_____
Boo-hoo.
Hamblin is in no place to play martyr when it comes to ad homenim-attack victimhood.
First, let it be noted that Hamblin has, in fact, a history of personal assaults on those who post here on "Recovery from Mormonism."
In this regard, in a stunningly hypocritical hit piece entitled, "Their 'Little Corner of Cyberspace"--pro-Mo apologists on the so-called "FAIR" board have attacked "the vehemence with which its detractors approach anything having to do with the [Mormon] Church' . . . [on the] the popular 'Recovery from Mormonism' message board, which receives up to 1,000 posts per day by a disgruntled collection of Mormon dissidents."
How is this known by the faithful?
Hamblin, his FAIR supporters confess, acknowledges "lurking on the 'Recovery' board for a while," where he claims to "have really been astonished by what I've seen [t]here."
Among other complaints, Humpty-Grumpty Hamblin waxes whiny about the "arrogance" he says exists on RfM, as so declared in his following observation:
"For many on this board, it seems that once your mind is freed from the shackles of Mormonism you are suddenly capable of being absolutely right about absolutely everything.
"When I find a cartoonist pontificating with absolute certitude about the history of religion, for example--on topics where mere mortals with PhDs have spent lifetimes of study and still are unable to resolve disputed issues--you will have to forgive me for being dubious about the intellectual rigor required by many on this board."
(William Hamblin, "Their Little Corner of Cybperspace," August 2003, at:
http://www.fairlds.org/Anti-Mormons/Their_Little_Corner_of_Cyberspace.html)
Snort!
People like Hamblin are hardly occupying the high ground in pointing fingers at the supposed lack of credibility of ex-Mormon critics when, in fact, Hamblin himself has been guilty of astonishingly juvenile antics in blasting those critics in ways that cause adult students of Mormon studies to drop their jaws in utter disbelief.
Mormon apologists, reviewers and "researchers" in Hamblin's backwater bush league are notorious for savaging critics of the Mormon Church for supposedly being puerile and unsophisticated in the conclusions these skeptics reach about LDS doctrine, practice and history.
Case in point: FARMS offensive lineman (and we do mean "offensive") Hamblin--in ridiculing Jerald and Sandra Tanner's work, "Covering up the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon"--pompously asserted:
"[T]hey [the Tanners] simply refuse to deal with recent serious Latter-day Saint arguments . . . a perfect picture of the Tanners at the height of their ineptitude . . . completely fails to deal with [current LDS scholarly] interpretation of the Book of Mormon geography and archaeology . . . incapable of seriously dealing with academic studies and issues surrounding questions of archaeology and geography of either the New or old World. . . . [they should] stick to their . . . facile, ad nauseum demonstrations that Latter-day Saint doctrine bears little relationship to fundamentalist Protestant doctrine."
(Hamblin, "Archaeology and the Book of Mormon: "A Review of 'Archaeology and the Book of Mormon' by Jerald and Sandra Tanner," reprinted from "FARMS Review," vol. 5, issue 1, pp. 258-72, Maxwell Institute, Provo, Utah, 1993, at:
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=5&num=1&id=126)
**Here's the clincher, though, when it comes to proving that Hamblin is the last in line to be chiding others for not being serious.
--The "Metcalfe-is-Butthead" Highwater Mark for FARMS
Hamblin himself is about as serious as a whoopie cushion in a church pew.
John Weldon, writing for the "Apologetics Index," points to the stupidly childish FARMS case of "Metcalfe is Butthead," which exposed Hamblin's breathtaking immaturity in dealing with Mormonism's critics:
"FARMS is, as we know, an acronym for the 'Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies.'
"Unfortunately, after reading their reviews, etc., and examining their methods, an acronym equally suited for FARMS would often be: 'Frequent Artless Ridicule Made Simple.'
"This is particularly so in light of the 'Metcalfe is Butthead' acronym fiasco, and similar matters. We mean no disrespect toward the more balanced FARMS writers, but FARMS style and antics are often less than scholarly."
(John Weldon, "Appendix 2: FARMS Review of Books," at:
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/cpoint10-6.html)
Just what, exactly, was this "fiasco" and how was Hamblin involved in it?
An answer to that question exposes the FARMS boys as engaging (and eventually being caught in) some of the most infantile, imbecilic antics imaginable.
Lecturer John Hatch, in an address at a "Sunstone" symposium entitled "Why I No Longer Trust the FARMS Review of Books," detailed this extremely unprofessional and embarrassing moment in the history of FARMS's juvenile and scurrilous attacks on Mormonism's critics:
"Mormon book collectors know there is one issue of FARMS Review of Books that is extremely rare. It is the first statement of issue 6:1, the issue that was almost entirely dedicated to reviewing Brent Metcalfe's book, 'New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology.'
"The amount of space spent reviewing Metcalfe and his book is almost three hundred pages.
"However, the important point for book collectors is the review by William Hamblin. In his review, Hamblin originally included an acrostic. An acrostic is something of a code or puzzle hidden within a set of paragraphs or lines. When one takes the first or last letter of the line or paragraph and puts them together, they form a word or phrase, similar to an acronym.
"In this instance, by taking the first letter of every paragraph in the first few pages of Hamblin's review the phrase, 'Metcalfe is Butthead' was formed. After the publisher of the book threatened a lawsuit, FARMS reprinted the issue rewording several of the paragraphs.
"It was an incredibly unprofessional and downright immature move on the part of FARMS. Again, the question of 'why' springs to mind. Why is such a childish and personal attack necessary?
"Another disturbing facet of this story is the fact that the reviewer obviously spent the vast majority of his time trying to form the code that would spell out 'Metcalfe is Butthead' rather than trying to formulate a competent, persuasive review.
"Why?
"That is the question I have for FARMS that has never been answered. Why do they feel that scholars, church members, and even human beings can act the way they have at times and still be taken seriously and have the respect of others?"
Below is another account, from "Wikipedia," of Hamblin's back-firing butthead approach to Mormon "academics”:
"William J. Hamblin published an essay in a FARMS publication entitled, 'Review of Books on the Book of Mormon,' criticizing an essay by Brent Metcalfe, a writer who criticized the Book of Mormon. The point of Hamblin's essay was that Metcalfe criticized the Book of Mormon using circular arguments and by applying uneven standards.
"Hamblin's review included an 'acrostic' spelling out 'Metcalfe is Butthead,' a reference to one of the two title characters in the popular cartoon 'Beavis and Butt-head' that aired during the mid-1990s. (The acrostic was made up of the first letters of paragraphs spanning nine pages of the essay).
"After the 1994 publication went to press and a few early issues were distributed, it was caught by a FARMS editor who stopped the press run, recalled the issues, and edited part of the acrostic out.
"Portions still remained, with the post-editing acrostic spelling out 'METWHSFE IA BUTAHEAT.'
"'Associated Press' writer Vern Anderson wrote an article concerning the matter which was published in the 'Deseret News':
"'The salvos contained in the 566-page "Review of Books on the Book of Mormon" come as no surprise, given the longstanding animus between scholars associated with FARMS, many of them professors at church-owned Brigham Young University, and those published by the independent Signature Books. . . .
"'Recently a review by BYU history professor William Hamblin containing an encrypted message 'Metcalfe is butthead' was hastily edited out after the "Review" had gone to press.'
"Upon learning of the acrostic, Metcalfe responded, stating:
"'When I heard rumors that William J. Hamblin, FARMS board member and BYU historian, had a caustic encryption in his review. . . . I summarily dismissed them. Surely no legitimate scholar would stoop to such an inane level. However, it seems that I underestimated Hamblin's 'scholarly' prowess. Do Hamblin and Peterson's methods typify the brand of "scholarship" FARMS, BYU Department of History, and BYU Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages cultivates and endorses? Evidently some have shifted from apologist to misologist.'
"Those critical of FARMS use the incident as primary evidence of the mean-spirited nature of what FARMS produces. Those supportive of FARMS counter that the critics seem unable to look beyond the incident to address the actual scholarship in FARMS publications."
NOTE: The above “Wikipedia” article on Hamblin's “Butthead” antics was first published as “Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies," under the subhead "Metcalfe is Butthead.” That article was later edited to alter the subhead from “Metcalfe is Butthead” to the “Metclafe Incident.” This subsequent version also eliminated Metcalfe's response, but added Petersen's quasi-apology, which read:
"I am writing to apologize for my private practical joke. Whenever I write a paper Dan Petersen [Daniel C. Peterson] will be editing, I always include a joke or two for his enjoyment — fake footnotes, comments about space aliens and the golden plates, etc. The acrostic was simply a light-hearted joke for Dan's amusement. . . . “
Peterson's lackluster skinback is also quoted in Jerald and Sandra Tanner's article, "The Book of Mormon: Inspired Scripture or a Work of Fiction?," under the subheads, "A Disgusting Joke?" and "METCALFE IS BUTTHEAD--MET***FE I* BUT*HEA*," published in the "Salt Lake City Messenger," #86, June 1994, wherein the following is reported:
"Brigham Young University professor William J. Hamblin, who also serves on the Board of Directors at FARMS, was very upset with Brent Metcalfe. His anger against Metcalfe led him into making a very offensive mistake. When he prepared his response to Mr. Metcalfe, he included what he termed 'a joke' which eventually caused embarrassment to FARMS, Brigham Young University and the Mormon Church. 'Associated Press' writer Vern Anderson wrote an article concerning the matter which was published in the Church's own newspaper:
"'The salvos contained in the 566-page "Review of Books on the Book of Mormon" come as no surprise, given the longstanding animus between scholars associated with FARMS, many of them professors at Church-owned Brigham Young University, and those published by the independent Signature Books. . . .
"'Recently a review by BYU history professor William Hamblin containing an encrypted message--"Metcalfe is Butthead"--was hastily edited out after the 'Review' had gone to press.'
"('Deseret News,' 22-23 March 1994)
"As we understand it, 'Butthead' is an animated character that appears on MTV and is known for his crude and stupid behavior.
"After reading that the demeaning comment 'was hastily edited out after the "Review" had gone to press,' we closely examined our copy of 'Review of Books on the Book of Mormon,' vol. 6, No. 1, to see if any remnants of the acrostic remained in the book.
"To our surprise, we found that even after the article was revised, 12 of the original 18 characters remained (see pp. 434-42 of the FARMS publication). In this particular acrostic, the first letter of each paragraph was used to form the words. (It should be noted, however, that if a paragraph was part of a quotation from another source, it was not counted as part of the acrostic).
"Below we show the original message Professor William Hamblin wrote and the way it was later altered in an attempt to cover up his vindictive attitude toward Brent Metcalfe. The reader will note that in the modified version we have shown letters that have been changed with asterisks:
"METCALFE IS BUTTHEAD
"MET***FE I* BUT*HEA*
"It seems evident that those who were more sensible at FARMS realized that Hamblin's so-called 'joke' could have a very serious effect on the foundation and scrambled to correct the problem. According to Brent Metcalfe, the book had already gone to press when the encrypted message was discovered. William Hamblin seems to have realized that he made a very serious error in judgment and tried to pacify Mr. Metcalfe by claiming it was only a joke:
"'I am writing to apologize for my private practical joke. Whenever I write a paper Dan Petersen [Daniel C. Peterson] will be editing, I always include a joke or two for his enjoyment--fake footnotes, comments about space aliens and the golden plates, etc. The acrostic was simply a light-hearted joke for Dan's amusement. . . .'
"(computer message by William Hamblin, dated 14 March 1994)
"Brent Metcalfe wrote the following concerning Professor Hamblin's attempt to belittle him:
"'When I heard rumors that William J. Hamblin, FARMS board member and BYU historian, had a caustic encryption in his review . . . , I summarily dismissed them. Surely no legitimate scholar would stoop to such an inane level. However, it seems that I underestimated Hamblin's "scholarly" prowess. In the latest "Review of Books on the Book of Mormon" Hamblin had the first letter of succeeding paragraphs spell out the message: "METCALFE IS BUTTHEAD"
"'I say "Hamblin HAD" because the "Review" has gone back to press to rectify Hamblin's demeaning remark. I have been told that Daniel C. Peterson, FARMS board member and "Review" editor, approved its inclusion--I am unaware of other FARMS board members who may have known. Frankly, I'm stunned. Hamblin and Peterson's behavior is contrary to all Mormon ethics I was taught.
"'Do Hamblin and Peterson's methods typify the brand of 'scholarship' FARMS, BYU Department of History and BYU Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages cultivates and endorses? Evidently some have shifted from apologist to misologist."
"(computer message by Brent Metcalfe, dated 8 March 1994)
"If BYU professor Daniel C. Peterson did approve the publication of the rude statement, as Metcalfe claims, this would mean that at least two members of the FARMS Board of Directors were involved in the so-called 'joke.' . . .
"On March 9, 1994, 'The Daily Herald,' published in Provo, Utah, printed an 'Associated Press' article concerning the bizarre incident:
"'SALT LAKE CITY—Independent Mormon scholar Brent Metcalfe is shaking his head over a practical joke . . .
"'Metcalfe edited the 1993 "New Approaches to the Book of Mormon," published by Signature Books, which raised the hackles of many traditional scholars into the scripture that is foundational of the Mormon faith.
"'Indeed, the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, or FARMS, planned to release on Wednesday a 600-page book rebutting the essays in Metcalfe's book.
"'And thereby hangs the tale.
"'According to Metcalfe, the rude message was to have been spelled out in the first letter of the first words of the opening paragraphs of an article written for the FARMS book by William Hamblin, a history professor at Brigham Young University.
"'"The coded message was to have read, 'Metcalfe is Butthead,' Metcalfe said. He said he learned about it from someone who had seen the article.
"'Metcalfe said that according to the, er, scuttlebutt, FARMS learned about the encryption just as the volume was going into print, quickly halted the press run and rewrote and reprinted the offending pages.
"'But FARMS editor Brent Hall would not confirm that Tuesday.
"'The book will be out tomorrow. The book that will come out tomorrow will not have that,' Hall said. 'We had some problems with the book--footnote problems, binding problems, and an article that we thought needed some revision, which was done.'
"'Was the article Hamblin's?
"'"That was the article," Hall said. . . .'
"Both Hamblin and Peterson seem to be very skillful in making ad hominem attacks on those with whom they differ. Since Professor Peterson serves as editor of 'Review of Books on the Book of Mormon,' he sets a very bad example for contributors to that publication. Anyone who examines the articles written by Daniel C. Peterson, William Hamblin, Louis Midgley and some of the other Mormon scholars will see that they have sometimes been mean spirited in their attempt to save the [Mormon] church.
"Although Metcalfe is a powerful debater, in the book he has edited he has not used the vitriolic type of approach which appears so frequently in 'Review of Books on the Book of Mormon.' Professor William Hamblin accused Metcalfe of 'academic immaturity' on p. 522 of his response. We feel that Hamblin should take a careful look at his own writings. If we had written the tasteless acrostic mentioned above and had directed it at William Hamblin or Daniel C. Peterson, we would never hear the end of it. These scholars certainly use a double standard when they deal with those they perceive to be enemies of the [Momron] church."
(For the full text of this highly recommended "Salt Lake City Messenger" newslewtter article, see:
http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no86.htm#A%20Disgusting%20Joke. For my previous RfM post on Peterson's “Butthead” Bozoness--where the afore-mentioned “Wikipedida” article is quoted before it was subsequently changed--see: “The 'Butthead' of Bad Jokes: William Hamblin Defends the So-Called 'Cutting -Edge Scholarship' of the Maxwell Institute (spawn of FARMS), in the wake of Danny Peterson's Firing... .” by steve benson, “Recovery from Mormonism” discussion board, 21 June 2012, at:
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,537361,537361#msg-537361. For the currrent, altered version of the “Wikipedia” article, see: “Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies,” under “Metcalfe Incident,” at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Ancient_Research_and_Mormon_Studies#.22Metcalfe_is_Butthead.22*****
Try as some might to change the facts (and as hard as Hamblin hysterically and desperately manuevers to dance around those facts), the fact remains that Wild Bill is the self-created butt of his own bad jokes.
Good luck, Brother Hamblin--and enjoy your break.
Edited 48 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2013 11:56AM by steve benson.