mormonstories wrote:In full disclosure, here's another email I sent to Daniel Peterson and my supportive friends that was part of the dialogue:
[Names withheld]
I'm including below just a few of the comments about LDS apologetics from our recent survey of disaffected Mormons to aid you in your decision-making about these issues. I hope you find them useful. If you want more examples, I'm happy to provide. Thanks again for reconsidering your approach. -- John
From respondent 2108: “The biggest factor was the professional apologists. I watched FARMS and FAIR apologists treat people horribly. For example, Professor Daniel C. Peterson used to lurk on the Recovery from Mormonism site so that he could snatch up quotes from the people posting there, in order to humiliate them. This, coupled with the way apologists tend to treat critics (i.e., with ad hominem attack), was the lynchpin.// I would encourage him/them to do something about the apologists. I think they are the worst aspect of the current Church.”
From respondent 1746: “On honesty, stop leaving it to the apologetics. They are terrible and are doing more damage than good to people’s testimonies with their poor answers. For example....Book of Abraham.”
From respondent 1865: “Please stop the ridiculous apologetics. Their circular reasoning and logical fallacies do more harm than good.”
From respondent 2122: “Please stop with the apologetic as well. Fair and the Maxwell Institute contributed to my leaving the church.”
From respondent 2844: “As I studied Church history and uncovered many controversial historical evidence, I would frequent LDS apologetic sites for answers (e.g. FARMS (now the Maxwell Institute), Shields, FAIR). I soon discovered those sites rarely dealt with the controversial evidences but rather often skirted or obfuscated the issue and frequently resorted to personal attacks on the individuals who were publishing historical information.”
So were these emails to Daniel Peterson or to the GA, with Daniel receiving as carbon copy? Daniel has claimed you had sought far more than just contacting him. It seems instead of first contacting him, you contacted a GA to put a stop it to.
This isn't full disclosure. I think I understand more where his comments in that email come from, if this is the case.
This whole affair is quite shameful.
Here is DCP's attempt to offer some disclosure, which it appears sheds some pretty good light on John's claim of full disclosure. I know posters here won't see this dishonest claim of his, because his other dishonest claim was twisted to suggest DCP used a word he did not use.
http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/577 ... 1209121275
Sadly, no one has a full story save for a few and we're all eating it up and sharing our biased views. Go here, and everyone think MI and DCP are bad. Go there, and everyone is questioning John's morals and honesty. Gotta say, they have some good points over there.