Tvedtnes: Author of "more than 300" articles?

[_Trevor]

I love the allusion to John Tvedtnes's supposed "rage."

I can feel that rage through the cybersphere. Positively creepy.

[_Dr. Shades]

Okay, we've established that Tvedtnes is mighty peeved at Brenton Yorgason.

But did Yorgason ever claim anything that the prophets disagree with?

[_JustMe]

I don't think Tvedtnes was peeved at all at Yorgason. I think he just powerfully demonstrated his weaknesses. It has nothing to do personally with the man.

[_Pokatator]

JustMe are you related to WhyMe?

[_JustMe]

Yeah he's my alternate ego.

[_Gadianton]

I don't think Tvedtnes was peeved at all at Yorgason. I think he just powerfully demonstrated his weaknesses. It has nothing to do personally with the man.

Of course, how could we get inside the mind of Tvedtnes? Certainly, no matter how harsh his language there could always be another interpretation if all we have are his behaviors absent any reports from him of his own feelings.

So what can I say other than, read it and weap:

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=2&id=162

The Tanners claim that their book Covering Up the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon "certainly agitated some of the scholars at the Mormon Church's Brigham Young University and the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies" (p. 1). I cannot speak for others, but I, for one, was not agitated.

On another occasion, I was agitated by a booklet written by Brenton Yorgason, Little Known Evidences of the Book of Mormon,

The emphasis is his

So I wasn't just picking on the Tanners. If anything, I was picking on Yorgason's pro-Book of Mormon work.

I suggest next time you set out to correct someone with my track record of clear hits and careful research, that you familiarize yourself with the literature first.

I hope you've learned a valuable lesson today.

[_harmony]

I hope you've learned a valuable lesson today.

Geez, Gad. Could you sound any more pompous?

[_Dr. Shades]

Geez, Gad. Could you sound any more pompous?

Let's face it: He did have a good point.

[_GoodK]

I suggest next time you set out to correct someone with my track record of clear hits and careful research, that you familiarize yourself with the literature first.

I hope you've learned a valuable lesson today.

Gad, you're my hero.

[_JustMe]

I don't think Tvedtnes was peeved at all at Yorgason. I think he just powerfully demonstrated his weaknesses. It has nothing to do personally with the man.

Of course, how could we get inside the mind of Tvedtnes? Certainly, no matter how harsh his language there could always be another interpretation if all we have are his behaviors absent any reports from him of his own feelings.

So what can I say other than, read it and weap:

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=2&id=162

Actually, I have been good friends with John for over a decade, and I actually asked him and here is the response. I don't read it and weep. I read it and enjoyed. Here's John's mind from one who actually knows him.

I merely felt that it was my duty to point out that his “little known evidences” were not evidences at all. I didn’t take it personally, but I am concerned that the booklet keeps getting reprinted, as if no review had been done. I don’t know who is spreading rumors about my intention, but please set them straight. In my review, I praised Yorgason for his personal testimony. My review is posted at http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... um=1&id=49

John T.