canpakes wrote: A quick check of the page below lists Peterson as the Founding Editor, and links to another stating that he "currently serves as Editor-in-Chief and Director of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative" -
Do the folks at METI just not update their site that often?
Well, that's confusing. If he has not left, then I think there is cause to be happy. I was bummed at the thought that DCP had left one of the very best things he has ever done.
Is it a plausible explanation that - with his inevitable ouster staring him down - Peterson and Bradford brokered a deal to save face between all parties by agreeing that Peterson would freely resign without a stink if he were allowed to be forever visibly credited with 'Founding Editor' and listed on his bio page as Editor-in-Chief, and with the understanding that there would be no successor ever appointed under that latter title?
canpakes wrote:Is it a plausible explanation that - with his inevitable ouster staring him down - Peterson and Bradford brokered a deal to save face between all parties by agreeing that Peterson would freely resign without a stink if he were allowed to be forever visibly credited with 'Founding Editor' and listed on his bio page as Editor-in-Chief, and with the understanding that there would be no successor ever appointed under that latter title?
Kind of like hanging his jersey in the rafters and retiring his number?
Maybe Peterson doesn't consider that enough "immortality" for his stature.
Ludd wrote:Kind of like hanging his jersey in the rafters and retiring his number?
Maybe Peterson doesn't consider that enough "immortality" for his stature.
I freely admit that I am way late to this discussion. I had heard of Daniel C. Peterson, but until coming here I had no idea who he was. But after reading some of the links and learning from you guys about the dynamic, I wonder if there are any rafters large enough for his 'jersey-ego'. Certainly the Marriott Athletic Center will not suffice!
A friendship that requires agreement in all things, is not worthy of the term friendship.
Ludd wrote:Kind of like hanging his jersey in the rafters and retiring his number?
Maybe Peterson doesn't consider that enough "immortality" for his stature.
I freely admit that I am way late to this discussion. I had heard of Daniel C. Peterson, but until coming here I had no idea who he was. But after reading some of the links and learning from you guys about the dynamic, I wonder if there are any rafters large enough for his 'jersey-ego'. Certainly the Marriott Athletic Center will not suffice!
Dr. Peterson used to frequent this board. I think he eventually quit because he usually took a sound beating here. There is a long history between certain members here and DCP, I don't know all the details.
I've chatted with him here a few times and found him responsive and usually polite. I do not have any opinions in common with DCP, but (from my point of view) he was not the most unpleasant of the wide range of apologists we have here. I don't recall him calling anyone names (maybe I missed those posts).
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
One of the things that has been difficult for me to remember is that with a name like "Mormon Discussions" we will have a broad spectrum of beliefs. That is foreign to me, because coming from NOM, everyone was on their way out of the Church, just that some were further along than others.
Here that is not the case, and some of you are still very much believers, if not in a literal sense, certainly a nuanced sense. I have to keep reminding myself of that when I read postings from different members of our community.
A friendship that requires agreement in all things, is not worthy of the term friendship.
Zadok wrote:One of the things that has been difficult for me to remember is that with a name like "Mormon Discussions" we will have a broad spectrum of beliefs. That is foreign to me, because coming from NOM, everyone was on their way out of the Church, just that some were further along than others.
Here that is not the case, and some of you are still very much believers, if not in a literal sense, certainly a nuanced sense. I have to keep reminding myself of that when I read postings from different members of our community.
So true! As a nevermo, there are many discussions here that I really don't feel comfortable joining. When some subjects come up, I've come to realize that I really don't have any valid opinion to offer (missionary stories, etc.).
I do find that the "broad spectrum of beliefs" makes for a really entertaining board.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Kishkumen wrote:for what it's worth, DCP remains the Founding Editor of METI. That is his current title in that project.
I just thought we should all be aware of that fact.
Perhaps someone should make Daniel aware of that fact... (September 2013) "Last month, amidst the continuing aftereffects and fallout of the events that took place within the Maxwell Institute in the middle of June 2012, seeing literally no alternative and no way to function, I finally resigned as editor-in-chief of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative. I hope the best for the future of the project, which I believe to be of enormous importance both in terms of scholarship and in terms of things far beyond mere scholarship."
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
January the 20th Dr Doeslittleelse reaffirms his position of not allowing himself to be drawn into the Dehlin soap opera by posting a blog entry titled:
“9 Actually Valuable Responses on What Happened to John Dehlin”
That's now five blog posts about Dehlin in two days from a man who proclaimed he has...
...absolutely no interest in becoming bogged down in the inevitable controversy that will swirl -- that is already swirling -- about John Dehlin and his impending disciplinary council.
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
