Whether Dr. Peterson eats Velveeta on Ritz crackers with a handful of Raisinets, I like his Travelogs. Interpreter donors and the More Good Foundation spend a lot of money to send him on his world adventures and only a fraction of it comes from tithing and fast offerings.
Those Frenchies might feign offense when Dr. Peterson rebuffs their wine, but his Muslim friends admire his sobriety.
This is, of course, completely false. Moreover, since I’ve denied such allegations on numerous previous occasions, I think it just to say that it isn’t merely an error. It’s a lie. A public and unashamed lie.
Since I’m asking for donations and for assistance, I want this to be clearly understood. No donations to Interpreter have ever been used to fund my travel. No More Good Foundation funds have ever been used to fund my travel. No tithes have ever been used to fund my travel. No fast offerings have ever been used to fund my travel.
I hope that’s clear enough for rational and decent people. (I realize that it won’t be enough for others.)
And, to be perfectly clear in the present case, neither my wife nor I nor any member of my family earned any money from the Witnesses film. None of us earned any money from Undaunted. None of us will earn anything from Six Days in August. In none of the legal materials or agreements for any of these films has there ever been any provision allowing for me, my wife, my family, my pets, or any of my heirs or assigns ever to receive any profit from the films. To the contrary, my wife and I have, ourselves, been donors and volunteers.
Me thinks the lady doth protest too much
He’s also forgetting that he told all his “SeN” readers that *the Church* paid for one of his excursions to (if memory serves) Australia. As I recall, this was around Thanksgiving a few years back. Maybe he feels that the funding came from somewhere else in the Church’s bureaucracy, but he cannot know that for certain. It’s reasonable to say that tithing paid for that one trip, at least.
And it’s strange that he can’t see that there is another possibility besides “lying.” For example, it could be that Moksha was poking fun at him. It would seem that the pressures of Mopologetics have robbed him of a sense of humor.
"If, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
I thought the money was sourced locally by the ward or a ward member who also had a luxury RV. If any of those contributors also happen to be "Interpreter donors," then Moksha is technically right.
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
And still we wait for a transparent account of the finances of the film Witnesses. I’m guessing Peterson benefited from a lunch or two paid for by the film. Maybe travel to and from venues, plus hotels. Or maybe the accounts will show nothing like that was paid for. It would show who got paid what though. And a transparent accounting was promised…
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
I thought the money was sourced locally by the ward or a ward member who also had a luxury RV. If any of those contributors also happen to be "Interpreter donors," then Moksha is technically right.
Sorry to have offended Dr. Peterson. It does not matter the source of income for his continuous years of travel. I am glad he is a man of the world and can ignore the ribbing of his fellow apologists when they make fun of him for eating "horse doovers" at those swanky shindigs before dinner.
