Book of Mormon Scholarship fireside with Dr. Peterson tonight

[Philo Sofee]

I don't have Facebook, so will that above link here in the thread work?

[Doctor Scratch]

I don't have Facebook, so will that above link here in the thread work?

It should! Let us know how it goes!

[drumdude]

Peterson just claimed that non-LDS Uto-Aztecan language experts have said they believe the LDS research (on the link between Hebrew and Aztec languages) is credible. It would be interesting to email them (there aren't many) to see if that is actually the case.

[Philo Sofee]

I now have my Sunday Live session responding to Dr. Peterson, which I will probably do tomorrow night instead! A lot of this is the same old, same old, standard stuff apologists have touted for decades, much of it outdated. Peterson KNOWS he is playing fast and loose with so much of this. But then, apologists do that. He is as bad as Muhlestein and Gee on continually using outdated materials. They have no choice because the updates do not strengthen testimonies like the outdated, wrong stuff with their incorrect interpretations, so it's best to remain outdated instead of doing the honest thing with the real evidence. What a farce! Definitely going to be a Backyard Professor rebuttal!

[drumdude]

Yep. When Dan went into the old grape cultivation spiel, I yawned and turned off the stream. Nothing new here.

[Gadianton]

Peterson just claimed that non-LDS Uto-Aztecan language experts have said they believe the LDS research (on the link between Hebrew and Aztec languages) is credible. It would be interesting to email them (there aren't many) to see if that is actually the case.

This claim has been demolished every which way to Saturday Jan 6 2024.

Symmachus -- well, we don't even have to go that far. There are no such non-LDS experts. If there were, he'd already have produced the list. There is, on the other hand, at least one such scholar who has eviscerated the material Peterson is talking about online.

Let me tell you precisely what DCP is talking about. There is single name that covers the sum total of such research from the Mormon world, Brian Stubbs. Symmachus has demolished his work a thousand times over, but never mind that. What DCP refers to is Stubbs stating that he has emailed some of his research to non-LDS colleagues and they have responded favorably. Has he ever produced a name? Of course not. There is no possibility whatsoever that in such an informal capacity and Brian being, let's face it, a pretty nice guy (especially for an apologist) his colleagues may have just been being nice, right Dan?

[Philo Sofee]

Peterson just claimed that non-LDS Uto-Aztecan language experts have said they believe the LDS research (on the link between Hebrew and Aztec languages) is credible. It would be interesting to email them (there aren't many) to see if that is actually the case.

This claim has been demolished every which way to Saturday Jan 6 2024.

Symmachus -- well, we don't even have to go that far. There are no such non-LDS experts. If there were, he'd already have produced the list. There is, on the other hand, at least one such scholar who has eviscerated the material Peterson is talking about online.

Let me tell you precisely what DCP is talking about. There is single name that covers the sum total of such research from the Mormon world, Brian Stubbs. Symmachus has demolished his work a thousand times over, but never mind that. What DCP refers to is Stubbs stating that he has emailed some of his research to non-LDS colleagues and they have responded favorably. Has he ever produced a name? Of course not. There is no possibility whatsoever that in such an informal capacity and Brian being, let's face it, a pretty nice guy (especially for an apologist) his colleagues may have just been being nice, right Dan?

That is exactly what I wrote on my notes as he spun this phony yarn. WHO has corroborated this??? My God that would be WORLD EPOCHAL NEWS and there were actual people saying yes in agreement, their names would be on the front pages of the New York Times. That he lamely just says oh a couple of my friends is all we need to know the chicancery, the crabbed, phony, lying for the church narrative Dr. Peterson shamelessly touts. But then he is talking to a whole bunch of ignorant ne'er do wells who are in the church and will not possibly be able to check up on this.

Not only has Symmachus decimated Peterson and Skousen on the Stubbs materials, wasn't it Symmachus or was it Dr. Stak who absolutely wiped out Peterson's utterly FALSE evidence on Alma? And chiasmus?! Really?! This late in the game that old song and dance shows up?! And the land Bountiful?!? No, this is Liar, Liar Pants on Fire type of apologetics, deliberately deceiving. Deliberately DECEIVING. Mormons have apostatized from the Holy Ghost and blasphemy the Holy Ghost in saying their testimonies because of this evidence, is true, when there is fundamentally NO ACTUAL WAY the Holy Ghost would ever tell that lie to them. They have no idea what the Holy Ghost, nor how it participates in the universe or what it feels like if they believe these deliberate lies of evidence have caused the Holy Ghost to whisper its all true into their hearts.
My mantra has become NEVER trust a Mormon apologist, NEVER. ALWAYS check their references and claims, because they always cheat and lie in some manner. Dr. Peterson has done what the Holy Ghost could not, he has strengthened my testimony tonight that I cannot trust Mormon apologetics to tell the truth of the evidence. And Nahom?????????????? Peterson STILL brings up NAHOM??????????????????????????????????????????
NAHOM????????????????????????????????? Is he serious?!?
NAHOM?????????????????????????????????
Ah, the joy is he gives me great fodder to slam and expose on my Live sessions! I am grateful to him for that.
As an aside, I will admit he looks pretty good in a beard! The Mormon cult needs to get off the missionary haircut style of its people, it's not natural, and it causes serious doubt and skepticism when the clean cut, clean shaved, white shirt and tie totin suits come around to "talk" to you, no matter what day of the week it is...
Again, we have the singular most current updated PROOF: NEVER TRUST A Mormon SCHOLAR/APOLOGIST AND THEIR CLAIMS...NEVER, NO NOT EVER. ***Daniel C. Peterson is perfect proof Number 1 why***

[drumdude]

I agree Daniel looks healthy and rested and seems to have even lost some weight. I wish him many happy years with his family, and hope he doesn’t waste the rest of the life he has left reiterating tired long debunked apologetic arguments.

[Philo Sofee]

I agree Daniel looks healthy and rested and seems to have even lost some weight. I wish him many happy years with his family, and hope he doesn’t waste the rest of the life he has left reiterating tired long debunked apologetic arguments.

He won't though. His entire testimony is based on false and misleading evidence, and he KNOWS this, as his favorite board to read is this one, and he has been soundly, scholarly, and logically thoroughly refuted on the vast majority of his impish evidences he loves to imagine makes the Book of Mormon ancient and authentic, and the really astounding testimony builder of truth is none of his evidences accomplish the goal. And he knows this.

[Tom]

Many jokes about Joseph Smith's deep learning and study at Cambridge, etc. John Gee has a degree in Egyptology, and Stan Carmack has a law degree and a doctoral degree in linguistics. Some topics I jotted down: early modern English in the Book of Mormon (divine joke?), stylometry, pace of translation, seismology and vulcanology, olive culture, execution of Zemnarihah, rhetorical density, Gadianton robbers and guerilla warfare, ancient warfare, chiasmus (I did not quite catch the story of an unnamed professor who was "troubled" by the presence of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon), Benjamin's speech and the Feast of the Tabernacles, Mesoamerican archaeology (e.g., concrete), Bountiful, Nahom, heavenly councils in the Book of Mormon, if-and conditionals, consistency with Mayan timekeeping (baktun), the name Alma, land of Jerusalem, simile curses, what was a Mosiah, Christopher Columbus, Jershon. Dr. Peterson brought a Mormon apologetics firehose to the stake centre. The address repeated many of the points in Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon and Reexploring the Book of Mormon. For that reason, the address didn't live up to its billing: "The Latest in Book of Mormon Scholarship."

His discussion of the name Alma failed to mention that it was a male name in the United States. He seemed to claim that we have most of the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon (we don't). He noted that his article on olive culture with John Gee had jokes in the footnotes. (I read through the footnotes last night searching for the jokes.)

Bottom line: a piece of Mormon apologetics that made no mention of difficulties and criticisms and that seemed designed to inspire wonder and awe in the audience (à la the Wizard of Oz).