F. Michael Watson Personally clarifies Hill Cumorah Letter

[drumdude]

DanielPeterson → Sledge • 3 hours ago
Sledge: "Looks like "they" are complaining about the "second Watson letter" again— heads up."

Dan: Sigh. This is a Really Big Deal for them.
I can scarcely recall what the issue is. It doesn't loom large in my personal history, whatever it is. I do know that they insist that I've lied about the matter, but, of course, I haven't. And, good grief, it was a mere blip, and it was, what, twenty or thirty years ago?

Ignore, minimize, deflect, forget.

Anything but engage with the fact that Dan was caught with his pants down.

Highly recommend the Mormonism Live episode on it. Dan has never engaged with any of their content because it’s so thorough and he can’t refute hours of meticulously detailed research with just 1-2 lazy sentences like he’s used to doing.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I probably will, but I will be in Greece until the end of June, so I may not get to that part of this glorious work.

I hope you will be able to breakaway for a few days and get lost in the death camps of Europe.

[Flemming]

The Ogden letter is the true one.

[Nimrod]

DanielPeterson → Sledge • 3 hours ago
Sledge: "Looks like "they" are complaining about the "second Watson letter" again— heads up."

Dan: Sigh. This is a Really Big Deal for them.
I can scarcely recall what the issue is. It doesn't loom large in my personal history, whatever it is. I do know that they insist that I've lied about the matter, but, of course, I haven't. And, good grief, it was a mere blip, and it was, what, twenty or thirty years ago?

It's much harder to remember a fabrication than an actual experience.

[Flemming]

We care about a low level secretary’s opinion now?

So your sources of truth are: a 93 year old curmudgeon, and a (probably very old) secretary.

Cool.

[Kishkumen]

We care about a low level secretary’s opinion now?

So your sources of truth are: a 93 year old curmudgeon, and a (probably very old) secretary.

Cool.

Actually, those would be their sources. If you have access to better ones, maybe you can help them out.

[Flemming]

I did. The Ogden letter.

[Gadianton]

We care about a low level secretary’s opinion now?

Flemming, allow me to fix your quote for you:

We care about a low level secretary’s opinion now?

[Philo Sofee]

DanielPeterson → Sledge • 3 hours ago
Sledge: "Looks like "they" are complaining about the "second Watson letter" again— heads up."

Dan: Sigh. This is a Really Big Deal for them.
I can scarcely recall what the issue is. It doesn't loom large in my personal history, whatever it is. I do know that they insist that I've lied about the matter, but, of course, I haven't. And, good grief, it was a mere blip, and it was, what, twenty or thirty years ago?

Ignore, minimize, deflect, forget.

Anything but engage with the fact that Dan was caught with his pants down.

Highly recommend the Mormonism Live episode on it. Dan has never engaged with any of their content because it’s so thorough and he can’t refute hours of meticulously detailed research with just 1-2 lazy sentences like he’s used to doing.

DCP can't even lie well anymore... "it doesn't loom large in my personal history..." he says!

[Dr. Shades]

We care about a low level secretary’s opinion now?

No, they do. They falsely touted it as the Second Watson Letter when it was nothing more than a copy-and-paste from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism.

Blame them, not us.

So your sources of truth are: a 93 year old curmudgeon, and a (probably very old) secretary.

A 93 year-old longtime member of the then-foremost Mopologetic institution in the world, and close friend of the editor of its flagship publication and frequent contributor thereto.