New BYU President

[mikbone]

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/c-shane-reese-byu-14th-president

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._Shane_Reese

 

Edited March 21, 2023 by mikbone

[Just_A_Guy]

51 minutes ago, mikbone said:

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/c-shane-reese-byu-14th-president

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._Shane_Reese

This will be . . . interesting . . . 

[Carborendum]

4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This will be . . . interesting . . . 

Other than the bios I just read, I have no idea who he is.  But... yes... 

I have a feeling.

[mirkwood]

22 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This will be . . . interesting . . . 

Why?

 

17 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Other than the bios I just read, I have no idea who he is.  But... yes... 

I have a feeling.

What/why?

[The Folk Prophet]

20 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This will be . . . interesting . . . 

...or...it won't be.

[Vort]

@MarginOfError's buddy?

[The Folk Prophet]

So I was reading an article on this and it led me to the Race, Equity, and Belonging report. And I gotta say, reading through it, I was pretty profoundly disturbed. Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting I disbelieve there is racism at BYU. Nor do I believe BYU shouldn't be doing more to deal with it. But THIS?!

I really don't get how a group of educators can seem so woefully uneducated on how to think about these sorts of things.

I mean just take the basic premise: "Black, indigenous, and other people of color" (BIPOC) feel unsafe.

So one has to ask...why? Right? The question is why. And the answer? Why, racism, of course. That's just the answer. No further exploration needed.

They literally mention DezNat in the report. We've discussed that in another thread. No one even considers that people being scared for their lives MIGHT....just maybe...be a problem with the people scared for their lives* rather than silly memes? No one? Of course not. DezNat is a euphemism for Nazi. Right? No further exploration, thought, or understanding needed. That's the problem! Yeah.

And some of the other conclusions... Someone in the BIPOC community comes to predominantly white Utah and then deals with some culture shock...(which, of course, is then called "racism")...and one of the proposed solutions... less white people!

Really?

I mean it's truly, legitimately shocking to me the way these educators seem to think. And, as it relates to this thread, for anyone who cares...the top signatory on the report: Shane Reese.

On a side note: my niece on my wife's side once posted on Facebook about this "amazing" book she'd been assigned at BYU that had opened her eyes to her white culpability (that book being How to Be and Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi).

Am I truly shocked that concepts that buy into this sort of thing (critical race theory, etc) have bled into educational thinking at BYU? No...no I am not. But as to the potential of seeing any changes for the better in this sort of regard from the new president............................................................

I am thoroughly disenchanted with higher education. For some reason I expect BYU to do better.

Because, obviously, the key to solving any victimhood mentality issues is to coddle them, right? Make sure they're never uncomfortable, never have to feel marginalized or teased or looked down upon or insecure or like they don't fit in. We all know that's the key to growing up and becoming a useful member of society, right? And, obviously, those of us who are white never feel those things.

 

*No one considers the cultural "victimhood" and stirred up politics of the matter? No once considers the trophy society we live in as potentially culpable? No one considers social media? Racial fearmongering? Etc., etc.? Nope. It's just white people are racists. Obviously.**

**So my daughter (6) is playing a video game currently called Dreamlight Valley. She loves to change the look of her character all the time. One of the things she did, at one point, was make herself into a "goblin". In doing so, she chose the skin color option that was the darkest (essentially black). Perfectly reasonable thinking for a 6-year-old, and entirely unrelated to anything to do with race. I was at a bit of a loss whether to say or do anything of it (I did not, ultimately). Sure, it could be a teaching moment about race...but then that also introduces racial issues to a child who has no sense of it at all, nor should she. She doesn't think of Tiana as a "black" princess. Tiana's just a princess. One she loves. She doesn't think of skin color differences any differently than she thinks of hair color or eye color differences. "Race" isn't meaningful to her. And whereas I know, at some point, I'll have to have the race conversation and make sure she's ready to tread the stupid culture we live in, I didn't feel it was the moment. Anyhow...the thought I had was how innocent it was, and yet how offensive it would be to certain people in certain situations. And, honestly, that's what I feel a lot of "racism" amounts to. It's innocence being interpreted as hurtful and malicious. People taking offence when there is nothing offensive. As I said earlier, I'm sure there are legitimate instances of legitimate racism at BYU. But I find myself truly skeptical that most of what was reported in said report actually qualifies.

Edited March 22, 2023 by The Folk Prophet

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

So I was reading an article on this and it led me to the Race, Equity, and Belonging report.

I couldn’t even be bothered to finish reading the report.  I was irritated within the first couple pages and was bored @ page 10.

Amazing how Official Declaration #2 is 1.5 pages and is clear and simple.

Whereas this above document is 60+ pages of recommendations based upon current social trends as opposed to the scriptures…

Where in the scriptures do you see the Lord honoring diversity?  How about unity and melting pot imagery instead?

I hate racism, bullying of any sort, and can’t bear to see the strong oppress the weak.  The Savior is the perfect example.

I would have liked to see more scripture passages and less wokeism…

[Just_A_Guy]

2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

So I was reading an article on this and it led me to the Race, Equity, and Belonging report. And I gotta say, readying through it, I was pretty profoundly disturbed. Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting I disbelieve there is racism at BYU. Nor do I believe BYU shouldn't be doing more to deal with it. But THIS?!

I really don't get how a group of educators can seem so woefully uneducated on how to think about these sorts of things.

I mean just take the basic premise: "Black, indigenous, and other people of color" (BIPOC) feel unsafe.

So one has to ask...why? Right? The question is why. And the answer? Why, racism, of course. That's just the answer. No further exploration needed.

They literally mention DezNat in the report. We've discussed that in another thread. No one even considers that people being scared for their lives MIGHT....just maybe...be a problem with the people scared for their lives* rather than silly memes? No one? Of course not. DezNat is as euphemism for Nazi. Right? No further exploration, thought, or understanding needed. That's the problem! Yeah.

And some of the other conclusions... Someone in the BIPOC community comes to predominantly white Utah and then deals with some culture shock...(which, of course, is then called "racism")...and one of the proposed solutions... less white people!

Really?

I mean it's truly, legitimately shocking to me the way these educators seem to think. And, as it relates to this thread, for anyone who cares...the top signatory on the report: Shane Reese.

On a side note: my niece on my wife's side once posted on Facebook about this "amazing" book she'd been assigned at BYU that had opened her eyes to her white culpability (that book being How to Be and Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi).

Am I truly shocked that concepts that buy into this sort of thing (critical race theory, etc) have bled into educational thinking at BYU? No...no I am not. But as to the potential of seeing any changes for the better in this sort of regard from the new president............................................................

I am thoroughly disenchanted with higher education. For some reason I expect BYU to do better.

Because, obviously, the key to solving any victimhood mentality issues is to coddle them, right? Make sure they're never uncomfortable, never have to feel marginalized or teased or looked down upon or insecure or like they don't fit in. We all know that's the key to growing up and becoming a useful member of society, right? And, obviously, those of us who are white never feel those things.

 

*No one considers the cultural "victimhood" and stirred up politics of the matter? No once considers the trophy society we live in as potentially culpable? No one considers social media? Racial fearmongering? Etc., etc.? Nope. It's just white people are racists. Obviously.**

**So my daughter (6) is playing a video game currently called Dreamlight Valley. She loves to change the look of her character all the time. One of the things she did, at one point, was make herself into a "goblin". In doing so, she chose the skin color option that was the darkest (essentially black). Perfectly reasonable thinking for a 6-year-old, and entirely unrelated to anything to do with race. I was at a bit of a loss whether to say or do anything of it (I did not, ultimately). Sure, it could be a teaching moment about race...but then that also introduces racial issues to a child who has no sense of it at all, nor should she. She doesn't think of Tiana as a "black" princess. Tiana's just a princess. One she loves. She doesn't think of skin color differences any differently than she thinks of hair color or eye color differences. "Race" isn't meaningful to her. And whereas I know, at some point, I'll have to have the race conversation and make sure she's ready to tread they stupid culture we live in, I didn't feel it was the moment. Anyhow...the thought I had was how innocent it was, and yet how offensive it would be to certain people in certain situations. And, honestly, that's what I feel a lot of "racism" amounts to. It's innocents being interpreted as hurtful and malicious. People taking offence when there is nothing offensive. As I said earlier, I'm sure there are legitimate instances of legitimate racism at BYU. But I find myself truly skeptical that most of what was reported in said report actually qualifies.

Interesting.  

Some of the usual suspects on Twitter are up in arms because Reese authored a letter last year defending BYU’s decision to shut down a program offering speech therapy to transgender folks.

But, yeah.  My earlier comment arose because a) the Q12 have hinted for a while that the GAs aren’t entirely happy with the direction that BYU has taken; but b) if there’s such a thing as a professional “swamp” or secularist/libertine “deep state” at BYU, Reese’s credentials suggest that he likely to be neck-deep in it. I would have expected the Q12 to bring in an outsider to clean house.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

I couldn’t even be bothered to finish reading the report.

Same. Maybe at the end everything is set aright.

[mikbone]

From the report.  You can’t make this stuff up!

 

c. BYU Multicultural Student Services, which serves some of the needs of BIPOC students, is located in the interior first floor of the Wilkinson Student Center. Students report that this location feels remote and isolated, perpetuating a sense of “otherness” and a lack of priority for their issues.

 

Found on page 13.  

The wife reported this to me.  I still haven't been past p. 10

Edited March 22, 2023 by mikbone

[Carborendum]

13 hours ago, mikbone said:

I would have liked to see more scripture passages and less wokeism…

That would certainly help.  Let's take a look at what they provided.

Quote

There was no contention in the land, because of the love of God which did dwell in the hearts of the people

 -- 4 Ne 1:15

I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine

 -- D&C 38:27

no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God

 -- Eph 2:19*

Love thy neighbor as thyself

 -- Matt 22:35–39*

might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly

 -- John 10:10

* = repeated

That last on is interesting in that it omits the first phrase of the verse:

Quote

The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

Let's see, who is stealing, killing, and destroying?  No matter what "side" you're on, I'd say those things ought to be condemned.

Through a 64 page document, we have five scriptures which pretty much all say the same thing: Love thy neighbor as thyself.  In this context, even the John reference says the same thing.

I don't think anyone is against loving their neighbor.  I don't think anyone is against treating each other as equals.  But the goal of the document seems to be that some people need to be more equal than others.

12 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Same. Maybe at the end everything is set aright.

No.  They didn't.  But it may not be as bad as it seems at first glance.  The wording can be taken a number of different ways depending on perspective.  And that is unfortunate.

• The problem is that we're seeing this through the lens of all the social upheaval that we see in the news every day.  And if that is the background on which they drafted this, then it is a monstrosity. 
• If, instead, they drafted this based on gospel principles alone, then this document does actually state those gospel principles.  And those principles are true.

They are due #2 if we are willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

I think #1 is more likely given that 

Quote

The BYU Committee on Race, Equity, and Belonging is united and deeply committed to realizing the recent call to action and reflecting the united declaration of leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the NAACP that educational institutions

I've found that the motivations of the NAACP have moved far from their stated purpose.

13 hours ago, mikbone said:

Where in the scriptures do you see the Lord honoring diversity?  How about unity and melting pot imagery instead?

Instead of answering this directly through scripture, I'm going to point to Tolkien's commentary on Saruman (the books, not the movies).  Saruman was "Saruman the White."  But when Gandalf came to him for help, he was wearing a rainbow colored robe.  Saruman declared, "I am now Saruman of many colors."  He explained that we cannot be held to a single standard, but welcome all sources.

Compare that with Joseph's "coat of many colors" and with the symbol of the rainbow as a covenant with the Lord.

The important distinction is the difference between light and pigment. 

• When combining all frequencies of light, we get white.
• When combining all colors of pigments, we get black or a very dark muddy color.

If it is light, it is of God.  If it is of man's understanding, we get stuck in the mire or pitch.

So,

• diversity of race and personalities?  No problem.
• diversity of ideology and ideas of right and wrong?  Big problem.

The problem I see is that we then end up asking "what ideology is right or wrong?"  At BYU the answer should be simple.  The teaching of Jesus Christ (rainbow, light). The main problem I have with documents such as this encourage ideologies that are NOT in harmony with the teaching of Jesus (filthiness, man's light).

BYU v So. Cal.

Growing up in So. Cal.  Racism was like second-hand smoke.  Even when you didn't participate, it was always floating around somewhere.  My friends of all races made ethnic jokes of all races (including white).  Even friends would make ethnic jokes about their friends.  Did it hurt?  Often.  Much?  Not much.  My friends made up a particular term for me specifically making fun of how I looked (I won't repeat the term).  These were my friends that did this.  And you know what?  I did too.  We didn't even know it was wrong.  My (white) 5th grade teacher once had to call the class to order and explain to us that we need to stop telling ethnic jokes.  I had never heard the term before.  So, she had to explain it. 

My first reaction was, "But everyone does that." 
She responded, "Yes.  And it needs to stop."

Would it surprise you to hear that most of the kids (of all races) didn't stop?  Some did.  I had to think a long while about it.  I believe I've explained my position on that elsewhere.  But most people kept doing it.  And they did a lot more than ethnic jokes. But this story sums up the overall idea.

At BYU, even as an Asian guy, I experienced racism there.  I also knew a couple of black people (I met many, but only got to know two of them).  The black guy had it a lot worse than I did**.  The black (mulatto) girl was extremely attractive and had no problem with anything.  A lot of guys hit on her.  And most of the girls wanted to be like her and around her.

I had a few really bad experiences.  A few mild ones that were more annoying than hurtful.  But I never got the impression that it was all that common.  Certainly not as common as it was in So. Cal. public schools.  So, if people are crying about the level I experienced when I went there, they don't have a clue what real racism is.

**His experiences were much higher and more frequent on the annoyance scale.  But the really bad stuff was said behind his back.  None of it was overt because he was rather large and people were afraid of facing him.  People weren't afraid of me.  I weighed about as much as a 13 year old girl.  So, they said stuff right o my face.

I would pray that it hasn't gotten worse since I attended.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Carborendum

[Vort]

13 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

BYU v So. Cal.

This is discouraging and disappointing. FWIW, I, a white man, don't remember hearing much of this type of thing at BYU. When I did hear it, it was very out-of-place because it was so unusual. I grew up in Washington state, mostly the more rural eastern part, and heard racial deprecations fairly often. (It was much worse during the five years we lived around Tacoma, on the west side of the state, perhaps because there were significant numbers of actual racial minorities.)

I admit my racial status colors (PI) my perception. To clarify (NPI): I was reared in a household where my parents tried to teach us to be kind and polite, but certainly not the vomitous political correctness strait jacket we see so common today. We didn't really use any racially disparaging terms or tell racial jokes in my home, except for one uncle who seemed to have a fondness for racial jokes and whom we didn't see very often. On the other hand, I don't recall us ever getting together and explicitly saying, "This and that racial term are off-limits." We didn't use racial epithets in roughly the same way we didn't say swear words like "damn" or "hell" or more vulgar examples. So while my particular unique background obviously shaped my perceptions, I doubt my BYU experience is unusual. But of course, I would have been more likely not to have noticed or simply to have ignored racial comments, which would have been unlikely to have been targeted at me.

[The Folk Prophet]

10 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

diversity of race and personalities?  No problem.

But it is a problem when it becomes "forced" diversity of race and personalities.

Can you imagine if they applied the standards suggested to the church? All of a sudden my ward is a BIG problem. Because...you know...white. So, obviously, racist, right? Anyone of the BIPOC community who feels uncomfortable in my ward...well... obviously we need to have a special meeting place for them...and classes just for them...and ensure we always have BIPOC folk in the bishopric and other leadership...and we have to convince more BIPOC folk to move into the neighborhood...etc., etc... Because otherwise....RACISM!

It's the forced diversity that becomes the problem.

[Carborendum]

9 minutes ago, Vort said:

This is discouraging and disappointing. FWIW, I, a white man, don't remember hearing much of this type of thing at BYU. When I did hear it, it was very out-of-place because it was so unusual.

I agree.  It was very unusual.  But it did happen.  I hope that my post didn't give the impression that it was common.  As I said, I only experienced it a few times. 

One interesting thing I heard was a particular fireside they had on racial interactions.  It wasn't about "being racist" or anything like what you'd hear today.  This young woman spoke about the good and bad.  The most interesting thing she said was when her white friends said, "Oh, don't worry, we don't really consider you black."  She was mulatto.  Not the same mulatto girl I spoke of before.

Indeed, I found that to be a very odd thing to say to "comfort" your friend.

Edited March 22, 2023 by Carborendum

[Carborendum]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

But it is a problem when it becomes "forced" diversity of race and personalities.

Can you imagine if they applied the standards suggested to the church? All of a sudden my ward is a BIG problem. Because...you know...white. So, obviously, racist, right? Anyone of the BIPOC community who feels uncomfortable in my ward...well... obviously we need to have a special meeting place for them...and classes just for them...and ensure we always have BIPOC folk in the bishopric and other leadership...and we have to convince more BIPOC folk to move into the neighborhood...etc., etc... Because otherwise....RACISM!

It's the forced diversity that becomes the problem.

You know, I've never been asked if I would like to have an Asian class or anything of the sort.  The last ward I was in there was another Korean family (recent immigrants) who attended.  I became good friends with the father.

When boundary changes moved us to a different stake, I was the only Asian in the ward (my children of course were half-Asian).  Then all of a sudden in one weekend, we seemed to have a mass migration of part-Asian families.  No one asked any of us if we needed a new class or anything of the sort.  No one bothered asking if I or anyone else felt left out or ostracized or treated differently because we were Asian.  And I never cared.

I understand that Blacks probably have it worse, and especially in the Church because of the whole priesthood ban thing and all that came with it.  But I've been in wards with some black people who never felt singled out.  They were part of the community.

[The Folk Prophet]

8 minutes ago, Vort said:

or tell racial jokes in my home

I distinctly recall my dad telling a joke once where there were people working in a mine, and the supervisor assigned everyone (who were different races) to be in charge of different things. The Chinese guy got assigned to be in charge of the supplies. Then, later, the supervisor couldn't find him. He looked, here, there, everywhere. No Chinese guy. He finally searched deep into the mine and the Chinese guy jumps out from behind a mine cart and yells, "SUPPLIES!"

That's about the extent of any "racist" jokes in my home growing up.

[The Folk Prophet]

18 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

You know, I've never been asked if I would like to have an Asian class or anything of the sort.  The last ward I was in there was another Korean family (recent immigrants) who attended.  I became good friends with the father.

When boundary changes moved us to a different stake, I was the only Asian in the ward (my children of course were half-Asian).  Then all of a sudden in one weekend, we seemed to have a mass migration of part-Asian families.  No one asked any of us if we needed a new class or anything of the sort.  No one bothered asking if I or anyone else felt left out or ostracized or treated differently because we were Asian.  And I never cared.

I understand that Blacks probably have it worse, and especially in the Church because of the whole priesthood ban thing and all that came with it.  But I've been in wards with some black people who never felt singled out.  They were part of the community.

We had a family in our ward where the wife was Japanese. After a few years, they decided to stop attending their local ward to instead go to a Japanese ward somewhere. But...and here's the big thing... the only reason a "Japenese" ward exists is because of the language. Not the race.

If there are language issues, it makes sense. Like having Spanish wards. But separating out because of skin color would be terrible. That's essentially some of what the report was proposing. Let's divide everyone further by separating out those based on skin color into a special place where they can be segregated from white people. That idea's being proposed everywhere and it's shocking.

It would make more sense if it wasn't about skin color. Like having a Polynesian club or something because of cultural appreciation. But making it about skin color is...well......racist.

Edited March 22, 2023 by The Folk Prophet

[mikbone]

Is posting this racist?

[Carborendum]

30 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Is posting this racist?

LOL.  What's funny about this photo is not that it has mostly Asians. It is that they all look like dorks/nerds, including the white kid.  I resemble that Venn diagram.  I've been all four at one point or another.

I'm having trouble explaining it without "sounding" racist.  But it is very common for Asians to be good at math (Half-Asian lawyer Bill "I'm not a math Asian" Richmond excepted).  This is simply a statistic, nothing more.  But it isn't just math.  Of overall IQ scores per nation, the nation of Singapore tops the list.  Part of that was how Singapore was founded.  But even so, the remaining Asian countries are still near the top.  Explanations abound.

Many people say it is because Asian families put so much emphasis on education that the parents study with the children to be sure they learn well.  There's some truth to that.  But it doesn't really explain it.

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Compare that with Joseph's "coat of many colors" and with the symbol of the rainbow as a covenant with the Lord.

Adam’s garment may have passed from Adam → Enoch → Methuselah → Noah — stolen → Ham → Cush → Nimrod –spoil of battle → Esau –traded for bowl of porridge → Jacob → Joseph.[1]  Hugh Nibley presents an excellent argument that Joseph’s coat of many colors was actually Adam’s garment.[2] The garment was redolent of the Garden of Eden, so it reminded Adam and Eve as well as the original patriarchs of the time that man walked with God.[3]  When animals caught scent of the garments they were pacified as well, a quality that Nimrod abused to become a mighty hunter.[4]

[1]Genesis 9:21-25, Genesis 25:30-34, Jasher 7:24-30, Jasher 27:4-12, Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.5, Part.2, Ch.1, pp. 169-171

[2]Alma 46:23-24, Hugh Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon, vol. 3, 51-52

[3]Genesis 3:8, 5:22, 6:9, 27:27

[4]Genesis 10:9

 

Alma 46: 24 Yea, let us preserve our liberty as a remnant of Joseph; yea, let us remember the words of Jacob, before his death, for behold, he saw that a part of the remnant of the coat of Joseph was preserved and had not decayed. And he said—Even as this remnant of garment of my son hath been preserved, so shall a remnant of the seed of my son be preserved by the hand of God, and be taken unto himself, while the remainder of the seed of Joseph shall perish, even as the remnant of his garment.

 

From Wikipedia...

According to the King James Version, Genesis 37:3 reads, "Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours."

Ford Madox Brown, The Coat of Many Colours; some have suggested that the phrase may merely mean a "coat with long sleeves"

The Septuagint translation of the passage uses the word ποικίλος (poikilos), which indicates "many coloured"; the Jewish Publication Society of America Version also employs the phrase "coat of many colours". On the other hand, the Revised Standard Version and the Revised English Bible translate ketonet passim as "a long robe with sleeves" while the New International Version notes the translation difficulties in a footnote, and translates it as "a richly ornamented robe".

Aryeh Kaplan in The Living Torah gives a range of possible explanations, calling the coat a "royal garment". It notes that passim has been translated as "colorful, embroidered, striped, or with pictures," also suggesting that the word could mean a "long garment" which reaches the hands and feet. The book also acknowledges that the word could discuss the material of the coat, which may have been wool or silk.

James Swanson suggests that the phrase indicates a "tunic or robe unique in design for showing special favour or relationship" and that "either the robe was very long-sleeved and extending to the feet, or a richly-ornamented tunic either of special colour design or gold threading, both ornamental and not suitable for working."

[Carborendum]

3 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Adam’s garment may have passed from Adam → Enoch → Methuselah → Noah — stolen → Ham → Cush → Nimrod –spoil of battle → Esau –traded for bowl of porridge → Jacob → Joseph.[1]  Hugh Nibley presents an excellent argument that Joseph’s coat of many colors was actually Adam’s garment.

Countdown to threadjack... 3... 2... 1... We have a derailment!

I've heard this from when Nibley was still alive and teaching at BYU. But I never heard it from him directly.  I'd really like to read his actual words on the topic.  If you have a link, please share.  I don't have those books as a hard copy.

As for Joseph, it doesn't fit with all the other things we know of the coat.

• The excerpts from Wikipedia that you offered.
• Similar to Ford Madox Brown, our scriptures have the same footnote.
• I have difficulty envisioning the exchange between Jacob and Esau including the exchange of clothing.  It is absolutely not even hinted at.
• Our garments are also reminiscent of the coats of skins.  But I don't hear anyone trying to say that they are remnants of Adam's garments.
• If they were that precious, do you honestly think that his brothers would have torn it and defiled them in such a manner?  They were jealous of him.  They would have known what the coat was.  Reuben or Judah or... would have wanted it for themselves.
• Gen 37:3 "And he made him a coat..."  It was not one that was passed down.  It was "made" for Joseph by Jacob, himself.
• Alma 46 doesn't indicate anything about this being the same coat handed down from Adam.  If anything, it emphasizes the fact that it was JOSEPH's coat, not Adam's coat that was handed down.
• For this idea to be true, it would had to have been "divinely preserved" for several millennia.  No leather lasts that long especially when it has been worn by so many individuals who were probably all of different sizes and shapes.

I hate to disagree with Bro. Nibley (which is why I'd like to see his actual words).  But I found it far fetched as a student.  And I find it far fetched today.

[Vort]

10 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I hate to disagree with Bro. Nibley (which is why I'd like to see his actual words).  But I found it far fetched as a student.  And I find it far fetched today.

The idea has strong romantic appeal to me, but as a practical matter, it seems both unlikely and dissimilar to how I understand God to act. We're not Roman Catholics. We don't have holy relics.

[mikbone]

49 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

If you have a link, please share.  I don't have those books as a hard copy.

https://www.templestudy.com/2008/03/24/josephs-coat-of-many-marks/

https://www.academia.edu/647209/Garment_of_Joseph_An_Update_Occasional_Papers_FARMS_no_4_2003_25_29

Edited March 22, 2023 by mikbone

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, mikbone said:

https://www.templestudy.com/2008/03/24/josephs-coat-of-many-marks/

I have no objection to Joseph's coat being a garment of the holy Priesthood. I own those myself. They are not the actual coat of skins given Adam by the Lord. It's the idea that the selfsame garment Adam himself physically wore being passed down and worn through scores of generations over thousands of years that I find hard to swallow.