Peterson Misleading Again

[_beastie]

Anyone else remember the big stink MAD defenders of the faith made over one of Dan Vogel's footnotes? It turned out that the paper was listed in the wrong box, but before that was made clear, some defenders of the faith were clearly insinuating Vogel fabricated it.

[_Trevor]

BORING.

[_Trevor]

Anyone else remember the big stink MAD defenders of the faith made over one of Dan Vogel's footnotes? It turned out that the paper was listed in the wrong box, but before that was made clear, some defenders of the faith were clearly insinuating Vogel fabricated it.

And the point is, if I am reading you correctly, that this has reached a level of stupidity that would be much better to step back from.

[_beastie]

And the point is, if I am reading you correctly, that this has reached a level of stupidity that would be much better to step back from.

Yeah, when we've descended to that level, it probably is a sign to stop. :O

[_Daniel Peterson]

Anyone else remember the big stink MAD defenders of the faith made over one of Dan Vogel's footnotes? It turned out that the paper was listed in the wrong box, but before that was made clear, some defenders of the faith were clearly insinuating Vogel fabricated it.

I wasn't among them.

Dan and I disagree fundamentally on fundamental issues as well as secondary ones, and we've clashed in print, at symposia, and even on television, but we get along fine and I would be perfectly astonished if it were ever proven to me that he had deliberately fabricated a piece of evidence.

I have no reason to think that my colleagues at the Maxwell Institute think any differently on this. (After all, we're the hive-mind of the Morg.)

[_beastie]

In regards to Hamblin's letter, I seriously doubt that he was uppity or disrespectful in tone in anyway. LDS - including apologists - are well trained to be respectful of their leaders, in general. He probably just laid out the reasons why so many apologists disagree with the Cumorah-NY connection, and the dangers of appearing to condone one location.

What's interested to me about this is that do appear to have the ear, to some extent, of GAs. In addition, it's one more example of how apologists are willing to disregard past teachings of prophets and apostles.

[_Daniel Peterson]

In regards to Hamblin's letter, I seriously doubt that he was uppity or disrespectful in tone in anyway. LDS - including apologists - are well trained to be respectful of their leaders, in general. He probably just laid out the reasons why so many apologists disagree with the Cumorah-NY connection, and the dangers of appearing to condone one location.

That would be consistent with my very vague memory of a quite short letter.

What's interested to me about this is that [you[?]] do appear to have the ear, to some extent, of GAs.

To a very limited extent. Not nearly so much as some like to imagine.

In addition, it's one more example of how apologists are willing to disregard past teachings of prophets and apostles.

No. (As is your wont -- and it's one of the reasons that I don't see you as a serious conversation partner -- your statement is spun, partisan, and question-begging.) It's an example of how we try to be precise in separating official doctrine from opinion or unexamined assumption. One of the foremost tasks of any kind of scholarship is to try to get things precisely right, to distinguish fact from common opinion, reality from appearance, truth from received notions. You dismiss that, but it's the lifeblood of the academic approach to virtually every topic.

[_Trevor]

Most exalted Brethren!

We, your most lowly servants in the cause of truth and righteousness humbly beseech thee in this our time of most dire need. Much to our eternal shame, we fear we have committed a trespass in that we did not properly read the divine signals wafting from the lofty heights of the most divine Church Office Building. It has come to our attention that in thy wisdom thou hast revealed new knowledge about Cumorah. Of course, we were blinded by the glory of this revelation and broke into spontaneous cries and tears of joy upon the discovery, but then we feared. How should we proceed next? Was this not a challenge to see how perfectly thy servants might act in light of this dazzling jewel of revelation? Clearly thou hast anticipated with thy divine foresight that the evil scourge of anti-Mormons and apostates will now renew their attempts to trip us up in our words. Not having thy celestial crania, we now pray unto thee that thou wilt save us from our benighted circumstance and tell us which steps to take. We do hope that we will not be found in thine anger for asking, but rather that we have acted as wouldst be most pleasing unto thee in making our petition.

The eternally grateful order of reverent Mopologists,

Fratres William, Daniel, Lou, etc.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Alright. Fess up. How did you get it?

[_Trevor]

Alright. Fess up. How did you get it?

I certainly won't publicly confess that I am somewhere in "etc."