Peterson libels(?) an opinion writer called Bob Lockwood

[IHAQ]

Bob Lockwood has been writing and publishing his opinions on the J.K.Rowling/Joseph Smith/Golf Plates evolving news story. Amongst other things in his opinion piece, Bill notes:

Joseph Smith’s family had a long history of digging for money and buried treasure, practicing “witching” with a hazel rod, which Smith claimed was a gift from God. He frequently used a “peep stone” that he would put into his hat to find hidden treasure. The witch-hazel sticks were said to “keep off evil spirits.” Affidavit’s signed by his acquaintances, neighbors, and co-workers testify at length to his entire family’s practice of these things.

https://newstalk1290.com/the-continuing ... e-Mormons/

Bill’s opinion pieces have gotten under Brother Peterson’s skin it seems.

Yesterday, on Thursday, 20 October 2022, an unfortunate fellow who evidently goes by the name of Bill Lockwood managed to expose his lack of knowledge about the witnesses of the Book of Mormon in a short but abundantly error-ridden piece called “The Continuing Saga of J.K. Rowling versus the Mormons.”

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... -1973.html

You would that what followed would be Brother Peterson’s explanation of where Bill Lockwood had erred in his comments. Not so. What we get is:

I confess that, when I found a photograph of Bill Lockwood online, having just finished reading the, umm, rather too confident articles in which he purports to “educate” his readers about a subject of which he clearly knows very, very little, a classic put-down immediately occurred to me: “All hat and no cattle.” Sadly, I also thought of the aphorism “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt” (which has often, but falsely, been ascribed to both Abraham Lincoln and Mark Twain). But applying those sayings to him would probably be unfair to Mr. Lockwood. I’m sure that he’s a fine man, and quite well intentioned. But he earned himself no credit with this weirdly confident little expedition of his into the (to him, clearly) Unknown. And, as he’s evidently a teacher for the Wichita Falls Independent School District in Texas, he’s caused me to worry about the quality of the instruction that is possibly being given to the pupils in his classroom. What other kinds of gross misinformation might he be inflicting upon them?

I don’t anticipate Brother Peterson to acknowledge the cheap ad hominem was a mistake, I don’t anticipate he will apologise for it and remove it. I don’t anticipate Brother Peterson to repent for his un-Christianlike attack on Bill personally, nor for him to speak to his Bishop about his bad behaviour.

I’d suggest though that Brother Peterson re-listen to General Conference (assuming he listened in the first place), and see if unnecessary personal attacks on people whose options differ is what the Brethren were advocating members do…

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

The Midge weighs in!

Avatar
Louis Midgley DanielPeterson
19 hours ago

Dan: You are wrong about Bill Lockwood. A search indicates that he is a Protestant preacher who begs for money to fight against the Church of Jesus Christ. The fact is that Mr. Lockwood tries hard not to understand our faith. And he is certain that Donald Trump actually won the election, which was stolen from him by evil people. He has a huge assortment of rubbish available on the internet. He uses this rubbish to beg for money

Boy, I hate to break it to the Midge, but ‘using rubbish to beg for money’ is as Mormon as apple pie is American.

- Doc

[dastardly stem]

Luckily this Lockwood character seems to be the type who deserves to be libeled.

[Kishkumen]

Luckily this Lockwood character seems to be the type who deserves to be libeled.

I mean, he is a Trumper.

[Gadianton]

Luckily this Lockwood character seems to be the type who deserves to be libeled.

Possibly, but what the apologists don't seem to get is that all the anti-science libertarianism that grounds themselves is the platform leveraged by this new wave of republicans. These people are a stones throw away from where DCP is now. Is there much difference between water witching and holistic medicine?

Senator Mike Lee who presumably reflects the Mormon majority in Utah supported Trump's stolen election gimmick. It's something a lot of Mormons believe. Midgley and DCP fuel the engines that produce the toxic exhaust.

[Kishkumen]

Excellent point, Dean Robbers. If you spend time propping up the notion that Joseph Smith is a reliable source of knowledge regarding Ancient America, can you credibly complain about conspiracy theories? I hear a yeah-but coming before the first sentence of righteously indignant criticism ends.

[Gadianton]

If you spend time propping up the notion that Joseph Smith is a reliable source of knowledge regarding Ancient America, can you credibly complain about conspiracy theories?

And in addition to Joseph Smith's knowledge, the constant skepticism towards the academy. I get that most academics have problems with academics. But to constantly point to rot that prevents historiography and linguistics from advancing -- to not only believe that the Book of Mormon is a real ancient text but with all the ground-shaking implications that change forever the way languages have developed not to mention that the study of all religions essentially becomes a study of Mormonism. That's not too different than saying big pharma is corrupt or Dominion is rigged and Q is right. The constant posting about science being wrong. The constant posting about Mendel being overlooked. Any loner with a controversial idea can become a David like Mendel did against institutional Goliath. Why Joseph Smith and not Q? Has DCP put the time into reading what the QAnon bakers say that he demands the world to put into FARMS?

The talking points about complete institutional failure are the same.

[Doctor Scratch]

I see that old habits die hard. Here we have DCP blowing a valve over the fact that this guy published material that contradicts the Mopologists' ideas about the witnesses, and so what does DCP do? Does he engage with the guy's arguments? No. Instead, he does an Internet search, finds out what the guy looks like, and then proceeds to ridicule the guy's appearance: "Ha, ha, ha! He looks like a hick!" And per Midgley, it seems that DCP may even have been making fun of the wrong person altogether?

Whatever the case may be, this is about as classic a case of Mopologetics as one could ever hope to find.

[Kishkumen]

I see that old habits die hard. Here we have DCP blowing a valve over the fact that this guy published material that contradicts the Mopologists' ideas about the witnesses, and so what does DCP do? Does he engage with the guy's arguments? No. Instead, he does an Internet search, finds out what the guy looks like, and then proceeds to ridicule the guy's appearance: "Ha, ha, ha! He looks like a hick!" And per Midgley, it seems that DCP may even have been making fun of the wrong person altogether?

Whatever the case may be, this is about as classic a case of Mopologetics as one could ever hope to find.

And there is the most important point. “He doesn’t know anything.” But what is he to know? That the pot shouldn’t call the kettle black? Seems like both people could stand to think about that a little more deeply.

[Kishkumen]

And in addition to Joseph Smith's knowledge, the constant skepticism towards the academy. I get that most academics have problems with academics. But to constantly point to rot that prevents historiography and linguistics from advancing -- to not only believe that the Book of Mormon is a real ancient text but with all the ground-shaking implications that change forever the way languages have developed not to mention that the study of all religions essentially becomes a study of Mormonism. That's not too different than saying big pharma is corrupt or Dominion is rigged and Q is right. The constant posting about science being wrong. The constant posting about Mendel being overlooked. Any loner with a controversial idea can become a David like Mendel did against institutional Goliath. Why Joseph Smith and not Q? Has DCP put the time into reading what the QAnon bakers say that he demands the world to put into FARMS?

The talking points about complete institutional failure are the same.

Skepticism towards the academy is warranted, but it only goes so far. Are LDS leaders an improvement on the academy? If so, in what respect? I don’t expect academicians to be paragons of virtue, and I do not look to LDS leaders for intellectual edification or methodological guidance in secular matters. Mopologetic skepticism toward the academy, however, is excessive and often poorly aimed. Sure, it is convenient to be skeptical toward the academy when uninformed assertions are taken as fact if they are uttered by LDS leaders. But the limitations of the academy do not make those uninformed assertions and wild claims right. In other words, the skepticism turns out to be a cheap dodge.