Radio Free Mormon: Daniel C. Peterson: The Artful Dodger

[_Shulem]

Radio Free Mormon takes on Daniel Peterson, once again!

Radio Free Mormon: 069: Daniel C. Peterson: The Artful Dodger of Mormon Apologetics

In other words, believing Mormon scholars and leaders have known about, and have openly spoken and written about, the various First Vision accounts for at least 50 years. There’s been no scandal, no suppression, and the often exaggerated if not altogether invented discrepancies between them have been thoroughly examined.

The supposed scandal of multiple First Vision accounts

[_Shulem]

In other words, believing Mormon scholars and leaders have known about, and have openly spoken and written about, the various First Vision accounts for at least 50 years. There’s been no scandal, no suppression, and the often exaggerated if not altogether invented discrepancies between them have been thoroughly examined.

Dr. Shades (Mr. English), are you there?

The first sentence says: "In other words, believing Mormon scholars and leaders have known about, and have openly spoken and written about, the various First Vision accounts for at least 50 years."

We know the 1832 account was made public and openly discussed for at least 50 years just as Peterson says above. But what about the second sentence? When does the word "suppression" in the second sentence apply? Does the word suppression apply to the last 50 years or all years prior to that -- or all time?

[_Shulem]

RFM,

I think Peterson has beat you at the word game. He's really, really, good at what he does. Of course, I could be wrong, I sometimes am -- and if so, show me how. But, I think that Peterson's paragraph using the word "suppression" works to his advantage insomuch as it applies only to the last 50 years.

[_Shulem]

Joseph Fielding Smith suppressed church history for 30 years when he hid up the 1832 First Vision account in his safe because that son of a bitch knew it wasn't faith promoting and was evidence that Joseph Smith couldn't keep his story straight.



Stupid damned Joseph Fielding Smith!

[_Markk]

In other words, believing Mormon scholars and leaders have known about, and have openly spoken and written about, the various First Vision accounts for at least 50 years. There’s been no scandal, no suppression, and the often exaggerated if not altogether invented discrepancies between them have been thoroughly examined.

Dr. Shades (Mr. English), are you there?

The first sentence says: "In other words, believing Mormon scholars and leaders have known about, and have openly spoken and written about, the various First Vision accounts for at least 50 years."

We know the 1832 account was made public and openly discussed for at least 50 years just as Peterson says above. But what about the second sentence? When does the word "suppression" in the second sentence apply? Does the word suppression apply to the last 50 years or all years prior to that -- or all time?

I just listened to the entire podcast, and the point is, at least for me, is that DCP Fagan is worse than a liar, he is a deceiver. He is telling folks with itching years what they want to hear.

And what is getting lost in all this is that even after 1960, it may have been taught, to a few, but was not or is not even taught today. You have to want to find it at the essays, or be a internet Mormon to find it. The casual chapel Mormon will see an article in the Chapel Mormon Gazette, and not have a clue of the real truth.

At any rate one thing is for sure after listening to the podcast, I will be singing Oliver for the rest of the night...” you have to pick a pocket or two...” :)

[_moksha]

Is the name Rappleye pronounce Rappley or Rapple Eye? Did this name originate from some ophthalmological condition?

[_Tad]

“Is it possible that Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, who headed up the then very small and non-professional office of the Church Historian and Recorder from 1921-1970 — a position that never in those days entailed the production of academic historiography — “sat on” one or more unpublished First Vision accounts? Yes, it is. I’ve heard some assertions to that effect, but I no longer recall the details, such as they were, and I would need to research a bit to be sure of the facts (if, indeed, it is possible to be so). Since the mid- to late 1960s, however — which is to say, just as I said, for the past fifty years — there can be no serious, plausible claim that the Church has suppressed the non-canonical accounts of the First Vision.“

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... ision.html

[_Shulem]

In the demonology of certain critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — especially of a relative handful of embittered apostates

Once again, as usual, he spells the name of the church wrong by failing to capitalize the "T" in the. I don't believe he is ever going to change. So be it.

[_tapirrider]

Thanks for the link to the podcast.

[_Markk]

DCP Wrote..."Is it possible that Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, who headed up the then very small and non-professional office of the Church Historian and Recorder from 1921-1970 — a position that never in those days entailed the production of academic historiography — “sat on” one or more unpublished First Vision accounts? Yes, it is. I’ve heard some assertions to that effect, but I no longer recall the details, such as they were, and I would need to research a bit to be sure of the facts (if, indeed, it is possible to be so). Since the mid- to late 1960s, however — which is to say, just as I said, for the past fifty years — there can be no serious, plausible claim that the Church has suppressed the non-canonical accounts of the First Vision."

Here Dan takes a caviler view on JFS suppressing the document and having selective memory as to whether or not Smith doing so is factual.

He wrote..."I’ve heard some assertions to that effect, but I no longer recall the details, such as they were, and I would need to research a bit to be sure of the facts (if, indeed, it is possible to be so)"

I thought this guy was an big time apologist? A founding member of FARM's, and a once major player at the NMI, but had only "heard" that JFS cut out the only hand written account of Joseph Smith of how he supposedly saw and was spoken to by the "Lord."

This guy is more than a liar, he is a deceiver, and must feel the folks are not capable of handling the truth, apparently he is not concerned enough to know the all the facts he is supposadly defending.