Skip to main content

2011 FAIR Conference


            Last year I attended the FAIR Conference for the first time and really enjoyed it. So this year I am going back. For those interested in Mormon Studies, or (more particularly) Mormon Apologetics, I strongly encourage you to attend.

            Last year there was ground-breaking research unveiled for the first time on the Kirtland Egyptian Papers and their connection to the Book of Abraham. This year will feature several speakers on a variety of topics. Here are just a few presentations that interest me in particular:

Stephen D. Ricks, “The Sacred Embrace in Ancient Egyptian Religion and Art”

Brant Gardner, “The Gift and Power: Translating the Book of Mormon”

Steven C. Harper, “Accounts of the First Vision”

Newell Bringhurst, “The 2012 Presidential Race and the Mormon Question” (As a political science major, I can’t help but get excited when my major and my hobby intersect like this!)

Don Bradley, “‘President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates” (This one sounds very promising…though I fear the title might be promising too much…I hope not though!)

Paul Fields, “Book of Mormon ‘Wordprint’ Analysis: How to do it wrong…and how to do it right” (My very good friend from high school, who recently finished his undergrad at BYU and has received a full-ride scholarship [or something like that] to Harvard for his graduate work, helped collect the research and data for this presentation)

Chris Watkins, “Excavating the Text: Archaeological Expectations for the Book of Mormon Peoples”

            There are several more presentations as well. The FAIR Bookstore also sets up shop at the conference and offers a lot of books as a discount price.

            For more information, click here. To get your tickets, click here.
Labels:

Comments

  1. Neal, expect to pleasantly surprised! =)

    BTW, how do you pronounce your last name?

    ReplyDelete

  2. Hey Don!

    Thanks for taking the time to visit my little, largely irrelevant, space on the internet. ;)

    I really look forward to what you have to offer this year, since the Kinderhook plates remain (in my view) one of the more confusing events in early LDS History. I hope you really have solved the mystery (also, I hope my comments in the posting didn't offend you, I just try to temper my expectations sometimes).

    My last name is pronounced Rapp-LEE. I know the "Y" in there really throws people off, they want to say it Rappl-EYE.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 15 “Best Books” to Read BEFORE Having a Faith Crisis

Elder M. Russell Ballard recently stressed that it is important for Gospel educators to be well-informed on controversial topics, not only by studying the scriptures and Church materials, but also by reading “the best LDS scholarship available.” I personally think it is imperative in today’s world for every Latter-day Saint—not just Gospel educators—to make an effort to be informed on both controversial issues as well as knowing reliable faith-building information as well.
(Given that Elder Ballard’s CES address was published to general Church membership in the Ensign, I think it’s safe to say that Church leadership also feels this way.)
An important step in the process of getting informed is reading the 11 Gospel Topic essays and getting familiar with their contents. But what’s next? How can a person learn more about these and other topics? What are the “best books” (D&C 88:118) or “the best LDS scholarship available”?
Here are 15 suggestions.
1. Michael R. Ash, Shaken Faith S…
16 comments
Read more

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:


As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…
54 comments
Read more

“The Dominant Narrative is Not True”: Some Thoughts on Recent Remarks by Richard Bushman

The following is making its rounds on Facebook (from this video): Questioner: In your view do you see room in Mormonism for several narratives of a religious experience or do you think that in order for the Church to remain strong they would have to hold to that dominant narrative?
Richard Bushman: I think that for the Church to remain strong it has to reconstruct its narrative. The dominant narrative is not true; it can’t be sustained. The Church has to absorb all this new information or it will be on very shaky grounds and that's what it is trying to do and it will be a strain for a lot of people, older people especially. But I think it has to change. As I have seen this quote flash across my Facebook news feed and thought about how to make sense of it, I have been reminded of the short essay response questions I would often have on tests or assignments in college or even high school. It would not be uncommon for these questions to be built around a quote from an important schola…
24 comments
Read more