Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_LDSToronto
_Emeritus
Posts: 2515
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:11 am

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _LDSToronto »

stemelbow wrote:
LDSToronto wrote:Mr. Elbow,

What is the difference between an internet message board and the FARMS Review?

H.


I don't see how it matters. The complaint is, "they are doing something I don't like".

When someone says, "well you, or those you are associated with, are doing the same thing"

I don't see how saying, "well, they do it but they have more credibility and a larger readership then we" is an adequate defense. Or, "well they are assuming to be more professional then we".

Either way, it doesn't really work. Either stop your endless personal attacks on LDS folks, and offer your complaints about them offering personal attacks, or accept it goes both ways. That's how I see it.

I know you guys have exempted yourselves for some odd reason.


Elbow,

FARMS Review, by it's association with the Maxwell Institute and BYU, claims to be a legitimate scholarly journal. An internet message board, on the other hand, is more akin to a pub.

H.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level."
~ Ernest Becker
"Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death."
~ Simone de Beauvoir
_LDSToronto
_Emeritus
Posts: 2515
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:11 am

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _LDSToronto »

liz3564 wrote:
Liz wrote:
I have spoken with Dan briefly about this incident. Although I will not reveal specifics due to confidentiality issues, I can say that Dan, having read the article, did not view it as a "hit piece", but merely as a piece critical of your work.


LDST wrote:Anyone who's read a Hamblin or Peterson FARMS review knows that what they call 'critical review' is really a lengthy ad hominem attack.

H.


I understand. However, my point still stands. No one has read the article. I cannot comment on it because I have not read it. John has not read the article either.

And, at this point, no one will read the article.

It seems that, in any case, the article will not be published. If it was, indeed, a hit piece, as apparently some of John's friends who did manage to read the article claim, then, MI did ultimately do right by John, and did not publish it.

What more is there really to say about this? John, it seems, has been vindicated, if, he was, indeed a victim of any wrongdoing in the first place.


I think we are all just finding much delight in the spanking Peterson's great and glorious ass received and want to savour the moment a while longer.

H.
Last edited by Guest on Thu May 10, 2012 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level."
~ Ernest Becker
"Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death."
~ Simone de Beauvoir
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _stemelbow »

LDSToronto wrote:Elbow,

FARMS Review, by it's association with the Maxwell Institute and BYU, claims to be a legitimate scholarly journal. An internet message board, on the other hand, is more akin to a pub.

H.


I think you meant trailer park.

Again. it doesn't matter. You don't like what some people do and want to use that against them? Then don't do that very thing. Or you can go ahead and do that and come off looking like hypocritical jackasses.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
_LDSToronto
_Emeritus
Posts: 2515
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:11 am

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _LDSToronto »

stemelbow wrote:
LDSToronto wrote:Elbow,

FARMS Review, by it's association with the Maxwell Institute and BYU, claims to be a legitimate scholarly journal. An internet message board, on the other hand, is more akin to a pub.

H.


I think you meant trailer park.

Again. it doesn't matter. You don't like what some people do and want to use that against them? Then don't do that very thing. Or you can go ahead and do that and come off looking like hypocritical jackasses.


I stand corrected. FARMS Review is much more like a trailer park than a scholarly journal. My mistake.

H.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level."
~ Ernest Becker
"Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death."
~ Simone de Beauvoir
_lostindc
_Emeritus
Posts: 2380
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:27 pm

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _lostindc »

Buffalo wrote:Liz, Hamblin suggested that it will now be published by FAIR instead of the MI.


Hamblin also threatened to release it today but he is rather busy packing for Ireland.
2019 = #100,000missionariesstrong
_Drifting
_Emeritus
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:52 am

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _Drifting »

liz3564 wrote:No one has read the article.


Well that's not strictly true.
It would seem that a number of Mopologists have read it and we can assume a GA or Apostle has read it. We can also assume that it's content was deemed unbecoming of a member of the Church from the fact it was canned.
We don't need to read the article, one can sense its contents from the actions taken.

This episode shows how far out of step from the Church people like DCP et al have become.
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”
Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric

"One, two, three...let's go shopping!"
Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _Buffalo »

lostindc wrote:
Buffalo wrote:Liz, Hamblin suggested that it will now be published by FAIR instead of the MI.


Hamblin also threatened to release it today but he is rather busy packing for Ireland.


"I'd whip your ass, but, uh, I have a dentist's appointment."
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _harmony »

liz3564 wrote:
Liz wrote:
I have spoken with Dan briefly about this incident. Although I will not reveal specifics due to confidentiality issues, I can say that Dan, having read the article, did not view it as a "hit piece", but merely as a piece critical of your work.


LDST wrote:Anyone who's read a Hamblin or Peterson FARMS review knows that what they call 'critical review' is really a lengthy ad hominem attack.

H.


I understand. However, my point still stands. No one has read the article.


You just said Dan has read it.

It seems that, in any case, the article will not be published.


To be more precise, it won't be published in FRB as presently constituted. What is to stop them from publishing it elsewhere? Or stop them from changing a few paragraphs and publishing it anyway?

If it was, indeed, a hit piece, as apparently some of John's friends who did manage to read the article claim, then, MI did ultimately do right by John, and did not publish it.


Only after SLC put the kibosh on it. Makes me wonder why they couldn't be bothered to do the right thing until then? I mean, seriously... it is that hard to do the right thing?

What more is there really to say about this? John, it seems, has been vindicated, if, he was, indeed a victim of any wrongdoing in the first place.


IF? C,mon, Liz. IF? Are you saying he was lying? That there was no article? That he was not a target? That there was no wrongdoing? If there was no wrongdoing, then there would not need to be a GA administering a slap (and yes, that was definitely a slap. We even heard it out here in the mission field). Hamblin admits there was an article; Dan backs him up. There is no IF.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

MDD is down. All the traffic on the thread over there must have overloaded the site. :)

Most of the responses there amounted to calling John Dehlin a tattletale. I think everyone on the Internet should be required to do some reading on the psychology of bullying before they're allowed to start posting.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Greg Smith, Dan Peterson, John Dehlin, & Lou

Post by _Buffalo »

I'm guessing they took it down intentionally until they can decide what to do. Those threads weren't doing FAIR/MI any favors.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
Post Reply