Rules of Patheos: Midgley appears to violate TOS 10x

[_Gadianton]

The Skinny-L list is bigger than ever, and it leaks like a sieve. I’ve enjoyed reading the emails.

I find this hard to believe. My understanding was that this list died years and years ago. What would they have to talk about anymore?

[_moksha]

What would they have to talk about anymore?

Battle plans for retaking the Maxwell Institute, influencing Salt Lake HQ, devising a scheme to dismantle Cassius U, and proposed hit pieces for the Interpreter Top Scholastic Journal.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Wow, what the heck is Midgley talking about?:

Or to write a book review without reading more than four and a half pages of chapter 33 of the second volume of Saints. My own reason for considering doing this is that the first those four and a half pages (and the related end notes) of that chapter are awful. So I am tempted to draw attention to a huge mistake on what I consider an important issue.

This might also give me the opportunity to correct some mistakes I have made a few times, since I have discovered that there is information available about which I was not previously aware.

What troubles me is that this volume was the product of a small army of presumably professional historians with the resources to track every bit published and unpublished material about a crucial topic and they botched it. Instead of drawing upon a very detailed and well written contemporary diary, they drew upon something written fifteen or more years after the event they describe. (This is, however, not nearly as bad as relying upon a letter wriiten seventy years after those events by someone who had just turned 12 when those events happened. And who was not a witness to those events.

I just came back from a Q&A about the forthcoming film that Professor Peterson has had a team busy filming on the Witnesses, all of which was very encouraging. After the meeting in Orem ended, I met several others who had served as missionaries in New Zealand, and who who were also furious about other problems in that volume that were much like what I discovered when I saw what that team of writers had included. I was also stunned to discover who they had vet what they had written. They could not have picked a less qualified person. For further reading they cited her work and another fellow who has been hostile to the Church of Jesus Christ for a very long time.

[_Lemmie]

Wow. Did someone hack his account?

Louis Midgley 3 days ago

We have had someone who posts as Little Old Donkey who once seems to have identified himself as a Lamanite, who now seems to have rejected that identity for reasons that are hardly rational.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4811570907

oh dear. Does he mean irrational reasons such as the Lamanites are characters in a fictional book?

[_Lemmie]

Wow, what the heck is Midgley talking about?:

Or to write a book review without reading more than four and a half pages of chapter 33 of the second volume of Saints. My own reason for considering doing this is that the first those four and a half pages (and the related end notes) of that chapter are awful. So I am tempted to draw attention to a huge mistake on what I consider an important issue.

This might also give me the opportunity to correct some mistakes I have made a few times, since I have discovered that there is information available about which I was not previously aware.

What troubles me is that this volume was the product of a small army of presumably professional historians with the resources to track every bit published and unpublished material about a crucial topic and they botched it. Instead of drawing upon a very detailed and well written contemporary diary, they drew upon something written fifteen or more years after the event they describe. (This is, however, not nearly as bad as relying upon a letter wriiten seventy years after those events by someone who had just turned 12 when those events happened. And who was not a witness to those events.

I just came back from a Q&A about the forthcoming film that Professor Peterson has had a team busy filming on the Witnesses, all of which was very encouraging. After the meeting in Orem ended, I met several others who had served as missionaries in New Zealand, and who who were also furious about other problems in that volume that were much like what I discovered when I saw what that team of writers had included. I was also stunned to discover who they had vet what they had written. They could not have picked a less qualified person. For further reading they cited her work and another fellow who has been hostile to the Church of Jesus Christ for a very long time.

And again, this time on a different but still completely unrelated blog entry:

Louis Midgley • 31 minutes ago • edited

For reasons that I will not go into, it turned out that I was a bit late to the presentation and subsequent Q&A last evening. I loved the comments and the responses to questions, even though I could not hear the questions.

One question clearly was about whether there was any indication that the Brethren might have some concerns about a film in which every effort has been made to have all the sometimes grim details set out. The answer was for me very gratifying. The answer was an emphatic YES. One reason is that Professor Peterson's pet film project can do things that otherwise probably cannot be done.

I had three people come up to me and introduce themselves and indicate that they had one of their parents serve as missionaries to New Zealand shortly after I did in 1950. They also had raved about their missionary experiences to their children.

I also had several people complain to me about the first four and a half pages of chapter 33 of the second volume of Saints. This is a very brief and somewhat (and unnecessarily) garbled account of how Maori came to become Latter-day Saints. In the middle of this seriously garbled account of how William Bromley, the Mission President, and two other recent European converts to the Church of Jesus Christ were confronted by Hare Teimana, who had a visit by the Apostle Peter, who showed him in a vision those three European Latter-day Saints, and indicated that they were his authorized agents, they have exactly two brief sentences about a document dictated in 1881 by Paora Potangaroa to a scribe, that fit exactly our missionaries and their message that brought many Maori in one place in New Zealand into the Church of Jesus Christ.

Potangaroa was a famous Maori matakite (seer) who passed away in 1882, and then in 1883 our missionaries, who could not then speak or understand a word of Maori, and had never heard of Maori seers, turned up in that very area and were immediately seen by many who were aware of Potanagroa's famous "covenant" as bringing the Maori the true version of Christian faith.

Since the second volume of Saints ends in 1893, this is probably the only opportunity for that series to even mention the fact that nine Maori seers played an important part in bringing certain Maori into the Church of Jesus Christ. This has to be one of the most truly remarkable events in our entire history.

I must again point out that a certain person who posts as a Little Old Donkey, beginning in September of 2019, for four months of sic et non has insisted, among other things, that I invented all this and then tried to force the poor Maori Saints, either in 1950-1952 and/or 1999-2000, or more recently, to believe things that I dreamed up.

I also had people mention that they were deeply troubled by other very serious flaws in the second volume of Saints. I am now trying to figure out exactly how I will respond to the botching of what appears to me to be the only opportunity to set out the role of Maori seers in the amazing story of Maori becoming Latter-day Saints that will be possible in this projected four volume narrative history of the Church of Jesus Christ.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4816515564

[bolding in original]

[_Dr Exiled]

I've kind of missed Dr. Midgley's derisiveness of those he doesn't like and am glad he's back from New Zealand. The contrast in his behavior and how I envision or probably anyone envisions how christians should act is a sight to behold. I can't wait to hear of his journey and how he protected the New Zealand Maori myth from the secular devils that surely crossed his path while down there. These devils were probably waiting for him patiently, while he stopped off at a local ward to chide the members there for a bit for not wanting to wear the Lamanite moniker anymore, prior to his returning to battle.

[_Lemmie]

I've kind of missed Dr. Midgley's derisiveness of those he doesn't like and am glad he's back from New Zealand. The contrast in his behavior and how I envision or probably anyone envisions how christians should act is a sight to behold. I can't wait to hear of his journey and how he protected the New Zealand Maori myth from the secular devils that surely crossed his path while down there. These devils were probably waiting for him patiently, while he stopped off at a local ward to chide the members there for a bit for not wanting to wear the Lamanite moniker anymore, prior to his returning to battle.

Yes, he’s really not a good example. He hunted up Gina Colvin’s husband, apparently:

Dr. Shades, he if he is at all honest, should report on his disgusting board that the Stake President soon located me and pointed out that Gina Colvin's husband, who has a PhD in Political Science, wanted to meet me. He pointed to him in the huge gathering of Saints who were not at all inclined to leave that meeting place. And I subsequently had a truly remarkable conversation with Gina's husband about several things. I now have a new genuinely faithful Latter-day Saint friend in Christchurch.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4816541994

And this:

Louis Midgley Ike 2 days ago

I don't think I should comment on my candid conversation with Nathan, other than to say that he indicated that he agrees fully with what I have written about what I call the Maori Latter-day Saint historical narrative, and Gina detests what I and others have written about this crucial topic.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4814685695

Given Midgley’s propensity to exaggerate if not outright lie, I kind of doubt Gina’s husband fully agrees with Midgley.

And, given the title of is thread, I’ll just note that his bizarre retelling of Colvin’s life story and his repeated libeling of her character over the last couple of days is thoroughly unChristian.

For instance, where Maori Saints love the Book of Mormon, Gina detests it.

She started out as a naïve primitive believer. But her work on a PhD thesis in journalism led her to read recent French philosophy, and this colonized her in a radically hostile worldview that has exactly no place for Maori things or the faith of the Saints.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4814685695

Gina Colvin, who once was a naïve faithful Latter-day Saint.

She worked out her apostasy on a blog call Kiwi Mormon. She has recently had her name removed from the the membership records of the Church of Jesus Christ, after she had become an Anglican lay preacher. Gina has subsequently become a member of the collapsing Community of Christ, which she thinks almost matches her own version of currently trendy "spirituality."

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4814441971

Since I have already mentioned Gina Colvin, I can report accurately that she is seeking a "spirituality" that also includes many of the recent social fads and fashions--that is genuinely Christian--but without any interest at all in the victory of God himself over all forms of death. Both Gina and the Community of Christ Apostle with whom she met in Independence admitted that they give essentially no attention to what follows our eventual death. Their attention was focused instead on really crucial "Christian" issues such as same-sex encounters.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4815736176

I change my opinion, nobody hacked Midgley’s account. That’s exactly how the gossipy little prick attacks people who he perceives as disagreeing with him. What a disgusting brat. If he were 10 he’d be grounded, and marched over to Gina’s house to offer an apology. What do you do with an 80 year old who acts like this?

[_Lemmie]

A question. What does Midgley mean when he says Colvin started out as “a naïve primitive believer” ???

Why are Maori people who are lds believers defined by Midgley as “naïve,” and “primitive”?

[_moksha]

Dr. Shades, he if he is at all honest, should report on his disgusting board that the Stake President soon located me and pointed out that Gina Colvin's husband, who has a Ph.D. in Political Science, wanted to meet me. I don't think I should comment on my candid conversation with Nathan, other than to say that he indicated that he agrees fully with what I have written about what I call the Maori Latter-day Saint historical narrative, and Gina detests what I and others have written about this crucial topic.

Given Midgley’s propensity to exaggerate if not outright lie, I kind of doubt Gina’s husband fully agrees with Midgley.

My guess is that Dr. Midgley contacted the Stake President and asked for the introduction so as to further his Project Sink Gina troublemaking adventure. If you hear any feedback from the Colvins, please let us know. I can well imagine what poisoned bits of sharkmeat Dr. Midgley left in the water at that Stake.

[_Tom]

In a February 15-16 Facebook post, Dr. Colvin shared her thoughts about her husband’s visit at church with Dr. Midgley. The comments are also worth reading.