It was Greg Smith who wrote what Dehlin referred to right? If that's the case then on Ralph Hancocks' blog Schryver posted a comment saying both he and his wife read it.
William Schryver: June 26, 2012 at 9:12 pm
Both my wife and I have read Greg Smith’s timely article. It is a well-written and exhaustively foot-noted treatise that shines a revealing light upon Dehlin and the numerous “contradictions” to which Ralph alludes above. Whether in the Mormon Studies Review at this time or in another venue at a later date, Smith’s article constitutes a much needed analysis of the growing “ministry” of the most successful example, to date, of a species of Latter-day Saint I have lovingly dubbed the “Evangelizing Apostates of Mormonism.”
Whether this article ought to have been, or not, published at this particular point in time is a valid question, many of the implications of which are entirely unrelated to the future direction of the Maxwell Institute. Therefore I concur with Ralph’s caveat concerning the causal relationships between Dehlin, the apparent suppression of Smiths’ paper, and the recent radical excision from the Maxwell Institute of the last remnant of F.A.R.M.S.
That said, it has been quite apparent to me, as I have observed matters over the course of the past several days since this story broke on a notoriously hostile ex-Mormon-dominated message board, that the Evangelizing Apostates of Mormonism have already established their own narrative that has defined the chain of causality in this affair. From their perspective, LDS Church leadership has hopped on John Dehlin’s bandwagon, moved to formally promote a secularist-dominated Mormon Studies program at Brigham Young University, and, to punctuate the abrupt change of direction, ruthlessly (and ever so publicly) repudiated Dan Peterson and F.A.R.M.S. and everything they stood for.
café crema wrote:It was Greg Smith who wrote what Dehlin referred to right? If that's the case then on Ralph Hancocks' blog Schryver posted a comment saying both he and his wife read it.
William Schryver: June 26, 2012 at 9:12 pm
That said, it has been quite apparent to me, as I have observed matters over the course of the past several days since this story broke on a notoriously hostile ex-Mormon-dominated message board, that the Evangelizing Apostates of Mormonism have already established their own narrative that has defined the chain of causality in this affair. From their perspective, LDS Church leadership has hopped on John Dehlin’s bandwagon, moved to formally promote a secularist-dominated Mormon Studies program at Brigham Young University, and, to punctuate the abrupt change of direction, ruthlessly (and ever so publicly) repudiated Dan Peterson and F.A.R.M.S. and everything they stood for.
"Jesus gave us the gospel, but Satan invented church. It takes serious evil to formalize faith into something tedious and then pile guilt on anyone who doesn’t participate enthusiastically." - Robert Kirby
Beer makes you feel the way you ought to feel without beer. -- Henry Lawson
One thing I find troubling (among many) about Schryver's screed there is the repetition of the apologetic lie that critics are the ones making the causal link between the spiking of the Dehlin hit piece last month and the sacking of DCP and Co. this month. That link was made by DCP himself in his email response to Bradford.
Daniel C. Peterson to Gerald Bradford wrote:The timing of my dismissal, coming immediately after my public crucifixion over the John Dehlin debacle, guarantees that it will be read as an institutional rebuke of me and all my works.
Is there no historical event to which the apologists will not try to give the revisionist treatment? It's only been ten days since this story broke, ferchrissakes. How stupid do they think we are?
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
Equality wrote:One thing I find troubling (among many) about Schryver's screed there is the repetition of the apologetic lie that critics are the ones making the causal link between the spiking of the Dehlin hit piece last month and the sacking of DCP and Co. this month. That link was made by DCP himself in his email response to Bradford.
Daniel C. Peterson to Gerald Bradford wrote:The timing of my dismissal, coming immediately after my public crucifixion over the John Dehlin debacle, guarantees that it will be read as an institutional rebuke of me and all my works.
Is there no historical event to which the apologists will not try to give the revisionist treatment? It's only been ten days since this story broke, ferchrissakes. How stupid do they think we are?
Q: How can you tell when they are lying?
A: When their lips are moving.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
It's kind of embarrassing how many of the apologists seem to think it's appropriate for an academic journal, sponsored by a major university, to publish a 100+ page, "footnoted" exposé of the religious views of the host of an Internet podcast. The tone of the article could be all hugs and kisses, and it would still be cringe-worthy.
Someone Facebook me when this Dehlin piece finally leaks. Thanks.
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07
MASH quotes I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it. I avoid church religiously. This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.
CaliforniaKid wrote:It's kind of embarrassing how many of the apologists seem to think it's appropriate for an academic journal, sponsored by a major university, to publish a 100+ page, "footnoted" exposé of the religious views of the host of an Internet podcast. The tone of the article could be all hugs and kisses, and it would still be cringe-worthy.
Yes. Really.
I am trying to imagine this happening anywhere outside the LDS world, and I just can't.
Let's just look at it again:
It's kind of embarrassing how many of the apologists seem to think it's appropriate for an academic journal, sponsored by a major university, to publish a 100+ page, "footnoted" exposé of the religious views of the host of an Internet podcast.
No, it is the bolded bits that do it. No wonder BYU wanted this to stop.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
A. The Dehlin hit piece B. Article on hell freezing over C. You
(I've made it easy for you by putting the answers in order of probability...)
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
