truth dancer wrote:I would like to say I am surprised but I am not... not at all.
I have come to learn that this is the common way some apologists "work."
As much as I would like to believe that these rather dishonest tactics are done without intent, I have a very difficult time believing these scholars are this incompetent, naïve, or uninformed.
Either way, it confirms the reality that the apologetic work of these men cannot be trusted.
~dancer~
I agree. There's no way that I'd call Daniel Peterson incompetent, naïve or uninformed. I suppose that leaves only one option, doesn't it?
Even though it's been said many times in this thread, I just have to add that this is truly a STUNNING find.
One of my favorite friends in the world is an archaeologist and member of the LDS church... we have had many discussions about the Book of Mormon and when I asked him about Book of Mormon archaeological evidence, his exact quote was, "There isn't any."
I think this is the honest answer.
There is no evidence for the Book of Mormon.
Doesn't mean one can't have faith. Doesn't mean the Book of Mormon isn't true. Doesn't mean the LDS church isn't true.
But there is no evidence. It is what it is.
Making up stuff to pretend there is evidence, or trying to give believers reasons to believe that are based on untruths, is not the way to go.
The dishonesty/disingenuousness/misrepresentation is more damaging than the lack of evidence, IMHO.
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
Runtu wrote:Wow, just saw the closed thread on MADB. What board war were they talking about? Seems like they closed the thread because of what was going on over here. Bizarre.
MAD has considered itself at war with this board since its' inception.
Daniel Peterson wrote:You're slipping into the all-too-common mindset here that "Mopologists" are dishonest.
That's unfortunate.
I'm sorry, but I just had to drag this up from one of the other horse threads. It's patently obvious now (to me anyway) why such a "mindset" would be common. I don't think that all mopologists are liars, but I think that their claims of evidence require especially close scrutiny since they have shown a tendency towards dishonesty.
KimberlyAnn wrote:I wanna know what Chris deleted on Bill Hamblin's newest thread about Dr. Peterson...
Hmmm?
KA
Heh. Just a snide comment about how everyone in Shadyville is totally obsessed with Daniel and determined to justify their irrational hatred of the Truth. I also thought about asking Bill whether it ever gets tiresome speaking in code every time he and Daniel have a conversation. But I restrained myself. After I deleted the comment, I reported Will Schryver's anti-Shades remark and gave "board war" as the reason. But nothing from the mods yet.
CaliforniaKid wrote:I reported Will Schryver's anti-Shades remark and gave "board war" as the reason. But nothing from the mods yet.
What thread was that in? What did will say?
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
I'm sure it's just a matter of time -- probably no more than just a few days -- before our friends in Shadyville (and elsewhere) have procured and thoroughly dissected Dan's address. No doubt they will demonstrate, in short order, that it is fairly rife with misrepresentations, gross exaggerations, unwarranted extrapolations from dubious sources, and leaps of logic that would shame any self-respecting scholar.
But this is Daniel C. Peterson we're talking about: the reigning prince of apologetic hacks; heir to the slippery Hugh Winder Nibley; practitioner of the peculiarly-Mormon art of "lying for the Lord."
Frankly, I will be surprised if a single claim in his address can be supported by a credible source.
Early Christians believing in theosis or a corporeal God! Right.
Next thing you know some Mormon hack will come along and attempt to show that there are ancient Hebrew parallels to modern LDS temple worship!
Runtu wrote:Wow, just saw the closed thread on MADB. What board war were they talking about? Seems like they closed the thread because of what was going on over here. Bizarre.
MAD has considered itself at war with this board since its' inception.
I post rarely there, but I don't think I have ever seen any reference to this Board, at least publicly. I hardly consider that a "war."
On the contrary, you and many others are obsessed with the MAD board. You report its daily doings; you obsess over Dr. Peterson. Most of you know little difference between right and wrong as you defame him and others with real names. Cast that beam out of your eye.