i was just wodnering...

[Guest tbaird22]

are any of hugh nibleys books or conclusions becoming dated? Just wanted to know before i start my 3rd.

[HiJolly]

I have heard some scholars saying this here and there - but I can't recall anything specific. I know that in my reading, I haven't come across anything worthy of note. His Egyptology stuff in his last book One Eternal Round seems just fine, including his characterization of Egyptologists in general.

Then again he did say not to hold him to anything he wrote more than -- what was it -- 30 years ago? And indeed, in Time Vindicates the Prophets he said some things against mystics that he later said he would not.

HiJolly

[rameumptom]

Nibley said not to hold him to anything he wrote more than 3 years ago.

Definitely read his books. They are a start. But remember that not everything he writes is correct anymore. And that some things he states were a clear stretch, even when he wrote them. Yet there are some great things in them for us to learn. Just double check with modern scholars on some of the bigger statements he made.

[HiJolly]

Off by an order of magnitude--- oh joy.

HJ

[Vort]

Hugh Nibley is arguably the most brilliant (and most entertaining) LDS scholar in history. His stuff is most definitely worth reading and listening to. But Nibley himself would be the first to tell you never to base your testimony on such things. Yes, much of his stuff would be considered outdated today. He is not the latest, greatest word on All Things Mormon.

Base your testimony on things of eternal worth and duration. For the most valuable thing Nibley ever said, you might listen to the last of his Time Vindicates the Prophets lectures, a capstone to the previous sixteen lectures which serves as his testimony of what he's spoken of.

[Guest saintish]

But remember that not everything he writes is correct anymore. And that some things he states were a clear stretch, even when he wrote them.

Are you saying that they were correct at one time?

[volgadon]

Most of Nibley is very dated. I've gotten several concrete examples which I'll post on.

[slamjet]

If Nibley is dated, then who's is not?

[rameumptom]

Well, you can start with people who are still living.... The Maxwell Institute and FAIR have many articles by current scholars to be considered. I am pretty sure most use current information and research. Some are better than others, however. You will just have to study and determine from the evidences given. It also depends on which areas of research you are interested in. While Nibley was all over the Ancient Near East, we now have many scholars who specialize, including into areas he was not familiar. Brant Gardner for Mayan/Mesoamerica is a good one to look to. For Arab studies, Daniel Peterson is at the forefront. Some have worked on ancient texts: John Sorensen (Old Testament Pseudepigrapha); Donald W. Parry, Andrew Skinner, Dana M. Pike, and David Rolph Seely (Dead Sea Scrolls), There are many up and coming LDS scholars as well: David Bokovoy, Daniel McClellan, David Larsen, etc. Several of these have blogs where they post research they are currently doing for their PhD theses, or post-graduate studies.

[MarginOfError]

If Nibley is dated, then who's is not?

Mormon youth under the age of 16.