The Top Ten Happenings in Mopologetics, 2012

[_Kishkumen]

The YouTube video channel is also called "MormonInterpreter."

D'oh!

In any case, Mormon Interpreter is doubtless what it will be called informally--as has always been the case. The other, formal title is too awkward. So, unfortunate McConkie and Maxwell associations aside, its acronym is and has been MI, and probably purposely so.

[_Tom]

More fundamentally, though, we don’t call our effort Mormon Interpreter. The journal is called Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture. And the journal is sponsored by The Interpreter Foundation. It’s pretty hard to get the initials MI out of either of those.

IJMS is an unfortunate acronym as it is already being used in the small world of Mormon studies by the International Journal of Mormon Studies.

Why does Interpreter need money? Our needs — now and for the foreseeable future — are relatively modest. We have no office or office staff, pay no salaries or benefits, print no books, employ no shipping personnel, maintain no warehouse inventory. But they’re not nonexistent. We do have to pay certain fees for online services and capacities, we have already (out of private pockets that should be reimbursed) rented rooms for a conference, and so forth. Most relevantly, perhaps, scores and scores and scores of hours have been donated for editing, typesetting, etc.

It appears that relatively modest or little editing has been done in some cases (e.g., the articles by John Tvedtnes, Royal Skousen, and Steven Harper).

[_Kishkumen]

In the "no hill too inconsequential to die on" file we see Dr. Peterson holding forth on his favorite topic of personal persecution by none other than yours truly:

Sigh. One of my harshest long-time critics, an alienated member of the Church who teaches at a university on the east coast, is now effectively calling me a liar regarding this weighty matter. (I must, apparently, be declared a moral degenerate in virtually every aspect of my life, no matter how small.) The journal was, he insists, originally called Mormon Interpreter, and this title was deliberately chosen, he believes, in order for it to bear the initials MI and, thus, to score some sort of obscure victory against the Maxwell Institute.

First of all, my ecclesiastical leaders would be most amused to find out about my continuing alienation from the LDS Church. According to Dr. Peterson, I did not happily witness my children participating in the annual Primary program, and I did not attend either Sunday School or Priesthood meetings this past Sunday. Perhaps he will insist it is so?

Secondly, I have no idea where an accusation of Dr. Peterson's moral degeneracy was leveled against him. Now, I think it is fair to say that he has a pathological need to be right on certain trivial matters, but moral degeneracy? No. Neurosis? Perhaps. But that is a minor charge which could probably be aimed at any one of us with some accuracy.

Do I "insist" that it was called Mormon Interpreter? I insist that it has been called Mormon Interpreter on a number of occasions, including the choice of its url and its YouTube channel, but I do not continue to insist that it was originally officially known as Mormon Interpreter. Indeed, I doubt that my comments rose to the level of "insisting" at any point.

Anyway, he contends, Interpreter is too awkward a title. Which is why people are always going to call the journal Mormon Interpreter instead. (Does that make any sense to you? Because it makes absolutely none to me.) Which we founders of the journal knew, of course — again proving that we were deliberately seeking to score points against the Maxwell Institute.

No, Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture is awkward. But you are certainly free to remove over half of the title because you agree with me. Good luck selling the Interpreter as a title for something that obviously deals with Mormon scripture though.

As for the last point, why on earth would anyone who knows these jokers be the least bit surprised that references to this thing as the MI were meant as a kind of dig at the Maxwell Institute? It's like we should all conveniently forget "Metcalfe is a Butthead" and numerous other sophomoric pranks just because he won't acknowledge them. I have to say that Midgley's use of "delineations" in the Dehlin piece was a nice touch. "Loftus Tryke Goes to Cambridge" was a low blow, however, especially when aimed at an author who was not an anti-Mormon like Loftus Tryke.

But surely they would never do such an awful thing as use MI as an insider joke, and one must vociferously deny the very possibility in order not to be tagged as a monster. Right?

LOL.

Civil conversation is impossible with people who always assume that one is acting, speaking, and writing in bad faith. And attempting such conversation with such people obviously isn’t worth the effort. (Still — foolishly, in retrospect — I tried for quite a while. With him and with others.)

Teasing works best when the person on the other end has a real sense of humor about himself. Clearly I was expecting too much.

Although he posts under a pseudonym, I’ve known his real-life identity for several years now. His frequently contemptuous, unjust, and uncharitable online treatment of me very often hasn’t merited such protection, but I’ve never revealed his identity nor offered any criticism of him — apart, that is, from his six-year-long career of attacks against me (and, sometimes, against my friends).

I admit to finding such behavior weird. And that he’s apparently so convinced of his own moral superiority I find still weirder.

If this weren't a known habit of his, one would be hard pressed to believe that he is the one posting this stuff, and not some malicious impostor trying to make him look bad. The only thing I will add to Daniel's liturgy about his persecution is that I sincerely hope there are no tears, blood, or even sweat issuing forth when he writes these jeremiads, unless laughter is somehow involved.

[_MrStakhanovite]

DCP Could learn a lot from young Randy:

[_MsJack]

You can leave MDB, but you can't leave MDB alone.

[_lulu]

Although I hate too deny you the honor, I would not call you one of DCP's "harshest long-time critics."

In the "no hill too inconsequential to die on" file we see Dr. Peterson holding forth on his favorite topic of personal persecution by none other than yours truly:

Sigh. One of my harshest long-time critics, an alienated member of the Church who teaches at a university on the east coast, is now effectively calling me a liar regarding this weighty matter. (I must, apparently, be declared a moral degenerate in virtually every aspect of my life, no matter how small.) The journal was, he insists, originally called Mormon Interpreter, and this title was deliberately chosen, he believes, in order for it to bear the initials MI and, thus, to score some sort of obscure victory against the Maxwell Institute.

First of all, my ecclesiastical leaders would be most amused to find out about my continuing alienation from the LDS Church. According to Dr. Peterson, I did not happily witness my children participating in the annual Primary program, and I did not attend either Sunday School or Priesthood meetings this past Sunday. Perhaps he will insist it is so?

Secondly, I have no idea where an accusation of Dr. Peterson's moral degeneracy was leveled against him. Now, I think it is fair to say that he has a pathological need to be right on certain trivial matters, but moral degeneracy? No. Neurosis? Perhaps. But that is a minor charge which could probably be aimed at any one of us with some accuracy.

Do I "insist" that it was called Mormon Interpreter? I insist that it has been called Mormon Interpreter on a number of occasions, including the choice of its url and its YouTube channel, but I do not continue to insist that it was originally officially known as Mormon Interpreter. Indeed, I doubt that my comments rose to the level of "insisting" at any point.

Anyway, he contends, Interpreter is too awkward a title. Which is why people are always going to call the journal Mormon Interpreter instead. (Does that make any sense to you? Because it makes absolutely none to me.) Which we founders of the journal knew, of course — again proving that we were deliberately seeking to score points against the Maxwell Institute.

No, Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture is awkward. But you are certainly free to remove over half of the title because you agree with me. Good luck selling the Interpreter as a title for something that obviously deals with Mormon scripture though.

As for the last point, why on earth would anyone who knows these jokers be the least bit surprised that references to this thing as the MI were meant as a kind of dig at the Maxwell Institute? It's like we should all conveniently forget "Metcalfe is a Butthead" and numerous other sophomoric pranks just because he won't acknowledge them. I have to say that Midgley's use of "delineations" in the Dehlin piece was a nice touch. "Loftus Tryke Goes to Cambridge" was a low blow, however, especially when aimed at an author who was not an anti-Mormon like Loftus Tryke.

But surely they would never do such an awful thing as use MI as an insider joke, and one must vociferously deny the very possibility in order not to be tagged as a monster. Right?

LOL.

Civil conversation is impossible with people who always assume that one is acting, speaking, and writing in bad faith. And attempting such conversation with such people obviously isn’t worth the effort. (Still — foolishly, in retrospect — I tried for quite a while. With him and with others.)

Teasing works best when the person on the other end has a real sense of humor about himself. Clearly I was expecting too much.

Although he posts under a pseudonym, I’ve known his real-life identity for several years now. His frequently contemptuous, unjust, and uncharitable online treatment of me very often hasn’t merited such protection, but I’ve never revealed his identity nor offered any criticism of him — apart, that is, from his six-year-long career of attacks against me (and, sometimes, against my friends).

I admit to finding such behavior weird. And that he’s apparently so convinced of his own moral superiority I find still weirder.

If this weren't a known habit of his, one would be hard pressed to believe that he is the one posting this stuff, and not some malicious impostor trying to make him look bad. The only thing I will add to Daniel's liturgy about his persecution is that I sincerely hope there are no tears, blood, or even sweat issuing forth when he writes these jeremiads, unless laughter is somehow involved.

[_Shiloh]

You can leave MDB, but you can't leave MDB alone.

No matter how often variants of this phrase are used, I still laugh every time I see it.

[_Doctor Scratch]

It's really hilarious to observe the strange juxtapositions on DCP's blog--the way he seems to cycle through a predictable series of posting genres: there's the staid, piously religious post, followed by some ZANY! (read: lame, and not really funny at all, unless you're like, four years old) piece of Web humor that was forwarded to him by some friend. Then you get the usual, hucksterish announcement about some fireside/cruise/tour/conference, etc. that he's involved in. Next is the disturblingly far-out political material mined from the right-wing Internet sites he reads. But then you get the *real* DCP--the posts that are like what we've quoted above: vindictive, grudge-carrying, hyperbolic, freighted with a woe all out of proportion to circumstances. Paranoid. Somewhat vicious. And so on. I would imagine that, to a casual, outside observer, these posts would seem wildly out of character, and yet Prof. P. doesn't have the good sense to censor himself (except for a couple of notable exceptions.)

[_Kishkumen]

Although I hate too deny you the honor, I would not call you one of DCP's "harshest long-time critics."

Neither would I, but what kind of person has the temerity to suggest that the classic-FARMS crew, lambs that they are, would ever conceive of having a laugh at someone else's expense?

That's pretty harsh.

And obviously completely unjustified.

[_Kishkumen]

...freighted with a woe all out of proportion to circumstances.

That is the part that gets me. Here we are, engaging in banter about the possibility that the informal name of this somewhat new journal might allude in some way to the informal name of the place where these guys once worked. Such antics are entirely in keeping with evidence they have happily provided us in their own writings. And, it is not all that consequential. Yet the very suggestion of the possibility sends him over the edge and into some rhetorical death spiral, which consists of a canned speech concerning my personal evil and unfairness that he reproduces, almost word for word, on such occasions.

It is bizarre.