To the contrary, Matheny, former chair of the BYU Anthropology Department's Promotion and Tenure Committee , was (years after his critical public remarks about BoM apologetics offered up by faithful Mormons that were based on insufficient evidence) listed as a nominee in "BTU Magzine's" "Professer of This Century" category. This category is described by the magazine as follows:
"The thoughts, memories, and praise shared for professors both well- and little-known convinced us further that each reader has his or her own professor to fill that position. The following article encompass the letters we have received nominating professors who have made a difference in their lives."
Matheny's nomination letter, as it appeared in "BYU Today":
"PROFESSORS OF THE CENTURY, PART II
"Ray T. Matheny, Professor of Anthropology
"Dr. Matheny is an excellent professional and academician. He sacrificed much to balance his time between research and students. His work in establishing the BYU Field School in southern Utah is well documented.
"Dr. Matheny was an effective mentor for students needing guidance in understanding the blend of science and theology required to study archaeology at BYU. He freely shared his wisdom when appropriate and pointed us in the direction of bishops and counselors as required.
"Many of his students have grown to be business and academic leaders. We remain indebted to Dr. Matheny's caring efforts in the sciences and in the art of being human."
(see: "Ray T. Matheny," nominated by Grace L. Duffy, class of 1971, Summerville, South Carolina, in "Professors of The Century, Part II," published in "BYU Magazine," Spring 2000, on BYU's official website, at:
http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=1138 ; also, "Professors of the Century," at:
http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=1143)
I don't think Matheny would have been showcased in such glowing terms in BYU's official magazine if he was considered by BYU's master--the Mormon Church--to have been an "apostate."
_____
P.S.: As far back as 1974, Matheny was debunking, as a modern-day forgery, the so-called "Padilla Gold Plates," apparently concocted to support mythical Book of Mormon archaeology. Matheny's concluding assessment:
"Since Dr. Padilla has provided testimony concerning when, how, and where the plates were found, and has maintained over the past 13 years that this story is true, the plates were investigated from the point of view that they were genuine. Each question that was generated about the technology of the plates during the investigation was treated in such a way as to discover the nature of the tools and techniques of their manufacture.
"Layout and cutting of the plates were remarkably accurate, to say the least. A flat surface, perpendicular reference, and precision measuring devices were required. In addition, the plates were cut by a fine-toothed saw, a type commonly employed by jewelers today.
These instruments were not available to ancient American metallurgists and were available to Old World craftsmen only in relatively recent times. The production of gold alloy sheet with the close tolerances of thickness of the Padilla Plates is most certainly a modern achievement. The production of gold alloy sheet with the close tolerances of thickness of the Padilla Plates is most certainly a modern achievement. The method of engraving is also a modern one, requiring finely-made, hardened steel tools. The making of cylindrical hinges in such perfect symmetry is also astonishing as is the fact that they were soldered by technique known only in recent times.
"The copied art motifs from the wooden lintel located at Chichen Itza and from the gold disk taken from the sacred well of the same archaeological site are clumsy attempts to portray authenticity. It is highly unlikely that these motifs, being individual works of art, should be duplicated in another medium by another culture at another location at another time.
"Further, the copying of the Aztec symbol from the Codex Borbonicus was an act of little ingenuity. It is difficult to imagine a written medium shoeing writing symbols used from the Book of Mormon period, which closed at A.D. 421, according to Pratt's chronology, mixed with symbols used over 1,000 years later by the Aztecs, and yet another of the Classic Maya period.
"The script used for the plates clearly was in part copied from the Mexican missionary tract which supplied a large percentage of the total number of symbols used. Not only was the artist apparently unaware that the bottom three lines of the Anthon transcript were not printed on the Mexican tract, but he also failed to understand the clustering of symbols that occurs in any language in his indiscriminate distribution of the Anthon figures. Additionally we must consider that the Anthon transcript was written with a quill pen or equivalent. This is evident in the fact that the symbols begin with a thin line, then widen on the curvilinear strokes. Thus, when we see the Anthon transcript duplicated on metal or other media with the same curvilinear strokes, we suspect that it is a copy from the pen and ink rendition, without a change in artistic style. Such a rendition in itself constitutes grounds for rejection.
"It is my opinion that the Padilla Plates are not authentic because of any one of the major technological anachronisms given above. But given all of the factors considered, the case against the authenticity of the Padilla Plates should be closed once and for all."
("An Analysis of the Padilla Gold Plates," by Ray T. Matheny, aper presented at 24th Annual Symposium on the Archaeology of the Scriptures," Brigham Young University, October 1974. at:
http://www2.bmaf.org/node/279)
Matheny is certainly no Bull Pooper for the BYU Lord. He deserves to be Professor of the Year for that alone.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2014 06:34PM by steve benson.