Rollo, your review is 100% in line with my findings as well, and thank you for taking the time to document the shameful hack job Smith purveyed in the name of "scholarship."
thank you!
cwald wrote:Dan "Who" Me?" Peterson sure spends a lot of time reading this board.
DCP wrote:
Anyhow, "Rollo Tomasi" has virtually disappeared for long stretches. The Stalker typically only posts a few times daily, and will sometimes vanish for several days at a time. Kishkumen, however, seems lately to be posting up a storm every day from the crack of dawn in the morning until late at night,
now there is yet another example of Dan's projectional delusions and hypocrisy.
In DCP's defense these forums have been absolutely addicting the past couple days. Very dynamic.
Come on take a look at what's going on at MAD and then over here. Can you really blame him for wanting to read these forums instead?
It's okay Dr. Peterson we got room for one more apostate in the great and spacious building. There's a face tattoo and a mirror of hard drugs waiting for you here. The water's warm and inviting.
why me wrote:This was written when you were out of the church.
The big difference being that Smith's essay was published for the first time well after Dehlin had returned to full Church activity; consequently, the essay released in unrevised form gives the reader the false impression that Dehlin was still out of the Church. Smith's essay should never have been released until it had been revised to reflect this development; otherwise it was just a pack of lies.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
wayfarer wrote:Rollo, your review is 100% in line with my findings as well, and thank you for taking the time to document the shameful hack job Smith purveyed in the name of "scholarship."
thank you!
Thanks for the kind words, friend.
DCP wrote:Anyhow, "Rollo Tomasi" has virtually disappeared for long stretches. The Stalker typically only posts a few times daily, and will sometimes vanish for several days at a time. Kishkumen, however, seems lately to be posting up a storm every day from the crack of dawn in the morning until late at night.
Wow, DCP really does watch this bb closely. He's right about me -- I have been semi-retired from Mormon-related bb's for a while. After being active on bb's for many years, I had grown tired and lost interest. But, I have to admit, the Greg Smith essay got my blood flowing again. The misrepresentations in that paper just had to be answered.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Rollo Tomasi wrote:Smith's essay should never have been released until it had been revised to reflect this development; otherwise it was just a pack of lies.
It really is.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
why me wrote:This was written when you were out of the church.
The big difference being that Smith's essay was published for the first time well after Dehlin had returned to full Church activity; consequently, the essay released in unrevised form gives the reader the false impression that Dehlin was still out of the Church. Smith's essay should never have been released until it had been revised to reflect this development; otherwise it was just a pack of lies.
The essay had to be released because people were still ranting about it. And also people wanted to read it so that they could judge for themselves about the content of it. But by calling it over and over again a 'hit piece' there was no choice but to publish it.
It was not personal toward John at that point, it was just business.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
Rollo Tomasi wrote: Smith's essay should never have been released until it had been revised to reflect this development; otherwise it was just a pack of lies.
It couldn't be revised. It had to be published as it was written before John returned to the fold. This was the only way to placate people. If it were changed, the critics would be up in arms about a revisionary piece, and still flaming Greg and Dan for hiding the original.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
quote="Rollo Tomasi"] Smith's essay should never have been released until it had been revised to reflect this development; otherwise it was just a pack of lies.[/quote]
why me wrote:It couldn't be revised. It had to be published as it was written before John returned to the fold. This was the only way to placate people. If it were changed, the critics would be up in arms about a revisionary piece, and still flaming Greg and Dan for hiding the original.
Really? Do you thing about what you write before you type it? But I will agree that it sure served Smith's purpose to paint John as an anti Mormon in sheeps clothing to publish it as it was before John's turn around.
Honestly I am amazed that anyone can say with a straight face that this paper was anything like scholarly or that it attempted to show the man Dehlin and his work in totallity. It did not have that intent at all. But it did was successful in what it intended to do. That is why you, as a sycophant to the aplogists are cheering it on.
You know, I hate to say it, because it is so rarely the case, but why me has a point. Had the hit piece been cleaned up, people would have protested. Really, the thing ought not to have been written in the first place, and its original intent to misrepresent and thus defame John Dehlin is clear enough. Once John Dehlin requested it be published, it was going to come out in some form. One can't have it both ways.
It is a hit piece, and now Greg Smith has allowed us to confirm that. Rollo Tomasi uncovered all of the dishonest shenanigans that were employed to make John look bad.
I think that about covers it.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist