Challenge to Dr. Scratch

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22050
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by moksha »

I've been repeatedly asked to challenge Dr. Scratch on the contention that Dr. Peterson denigrates the beliefs of other faith traditions. I get to roll the dice first and so my opening proposition is that Dr. Peterson never denigrates the beliefs of others or advances the claim that the LDS Church is the world's only true religion.

Your turn (others can join in too with affirmative or negative arguments and evidence). It would be a real treat if the denizens of the Sic et Non blog could pop in to lend support to this proposition. Remember, as with any good educational debate you can argue both sides of the proposition.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11438
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Shulem »

News from Antiquity
By Daniel C. Peterson

DCP wrote:Facsimile 3 shows an Egyptian scene with this explanation below: “Abraham is reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy, in the king’s court.”
DCP denigrates the gods of Egypt in promoting Joseph Smith's false Explanations that interpret the persons and meaning contained in the Egyptian funerary scene of Facsimile No. 3. Everything Joseph Smith said about Facsimile No. 3 is false.

DCP's attempts to justify Smith's claims is a slam on the ancient Egyptian religion and their gods. It totally denies the very writing that is contained in the Facsimile itself.

DCP's trickery and deceit using twisted apologetic tricks and mirrors only fools naïve members of his Church. The world knows better and completely rejects DCP attempt to justify Smith's false revelations.

Amen

User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 3973
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

moksha wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 6:36 pm
I've been repeatedly asked to challenge Dr. Scratch on the contention that Dr. Peterson denigrates the beliefs of other faith traditions..... Your turn (others can join in too with affirmative or negative arguments and evidence). It would be a real treat if the denizens of the Sic et Non blog could pop in to lend support to this proposition. Remember, as with any good educational debate you can argue both sides of the proposition.
Moksha,

There are MANY public statements by Daniel C. Peterson denigrating other faith traditions. There are so many, I honestly don't even know where to start. Did someone over at Sic et Non actually dispute that Daniel C. Peterson hasn't denigrated other faith traditions?

Here are just a few of the many, many examples of Daniel C. Peterson denigrating other faith traditions. I will provide many more once Daniel C. Peterson responds to these.

"I do think that the creeds, to the extent that they blind people to the truth revealed to prophets ancient and modern, are an abomination. Primarily, I think that because God said so, and I am hesitant to challenge him on it." Daniel C. Peterson, April 15 1998 http://www.shields-research.org/Critics/A-O_Min.htm

"You misunderstand when you imply that I think you corrupt. You may or may not be. I haven't thought about it. That would be a matter for your wife, or perhaps for the legal authorities to look into. Do I think your theological beliefs have been corrupted by various extra-divine influences? Certainly. And I regret it very much." Daniel C. Peterson in a letter to Evangelical, James White. http://www.shields-research.org/Critics/A-O_Min.htm

"I would respond that we Latter‑day Saints do, quite unapologetically, insist that Jews 'are not worthy enough to receive God's eternal blessing on their own." Daniel C. Peterson, "Anger over 'baptism' of Simon Wiesenthal"

"I'm not sure why some Jews appear to be offended by Mormon temple service on behalf of Jews. Jews have precious few friends around the world." Daniel C. Peterson, Mormon Discussions; March 15, 2011
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7817
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Very well said, Stake President Wang Chung. And it's worth noticing that the quotes you've cited span a period of decades. Does he do this all the time or make a habit about it? I would say, "No," but the fact remains that he *has* denigrated other faith traditions before. I know there is a quote floating around somewhere of him really trashing Calvinist beliefs. He originally said it over on the old FAIR board--I remember CK Salmon challenging him on it, and I know it was hashed out here on this board as well....
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 3973
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

Doctor Scratch wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 8:58 pm
Very well said, Stake President Wang Chung. And it's worth noticing that the quotes you've cited span a period of decades. Does he do this all the time or make a habit about it? I would say, "No," but the fact remains that he *has* denigrated other faith traditions before. I know there is a quote floating around somewhere of him really trashing Calvinist beliefs. He originally said it over on the old FAIR board--I remember CK Salmon challenging him on it, and I know it was hashed out here on this board as well....

Dr. Scratch,

Yes, Daniel C. Peterson has said some truly disgusting things about Calvinism, among other faith traditions. There was even a thread over at the Third Hour discussing Peterson denigrating Calvinism: https://thirdhour.org/forums/topic/1752 ... calvinism/

"Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I regard Calvinism as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous." Daniel C. Peterson

Moksha, let us know when Peterson responds over at Sic et Non and I will provide many more examples of Daniel C. Peterson denigrating other faiths.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6361
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Philo Sofee »

Peterson will do the paid apologist thang and try to change the meaning of the word denigrate so he can squirm out of the obvious to any 3rd grader........well, I mean Lou and Kiwi won't see it, but all other 3rd graders will be able to.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22050
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by moksha »

Everybody Wang Chung wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:34 pm
Moksha, let us know when Peterson responds over at Sic et Non and I will provide many more examples of Daniel C. Peterson denigrating other faiths.
Sounds fair enough. I did get this series of promptings when I checked a while ago, but nothing in response to this thread.
Moksha • a day ago
I had a conciliatory thought:

"BAN SHREDDED CHEESE and Make America Grate Again"
Hope that helps.

Perceptions of evilness can sometimes be offset by displays of kindness and empathy.

DanielPeterson Mod Moksha • a day ago
Do you have the integrity, Moksha, to openly disagree with my Malevolent Stalker in the very heart of his darkness? Directly?

That might offset "perceptions of evilness."

Sledge DanielPeterson • 10 hours ago
Of course Mock doesn’t have that kind of integrity. He is a pre-programmed bot who cycles through about 20 phrases, all fawning over MSt.

Moksha Sledge • 24 minutes ago • edited
What is up with this insult factory? This unending series of personal attacks seem very distasteful. Even if you're able to rationalize such behavior, you are deliberately undermining Dr. Peterson's claim that this is a well-behaved board.
I'm wondering if Sledge might be Stephen Smoot since Sledge mentioned him twice in posts on the same thread.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21210
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Is Steven Smoot related to Abraham Smoot? That might explain a lot.

- Doc

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11438
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Shulem »

Everybody Wang Chung wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:34 pm

(Quoting DCP:)

"Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: I regard Calvinism as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous." Daniel C. Peterson
:evil:

Perhaps I, Shulem, wasn't clear enough: I regard Smith's Facsimile Explanations as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous.

The ACB's of Egyptology condemn Smith & Peterson -- blasphemous liars fit to be cast into the fiery pit of Egyptian hell to weep and wail.
Last edited by Shulem on Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 4:38 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Physics Guy »

D.C. Peterson apparently wrote: I regard Calvinism as repulsive, its morality disgusting, and its teaching about God as blasphemous."
To be honest, I agree. I've admired and respected some Christian Reformed people, so although I don't understand how they can possibly have tolerated Calvinism, for their sake I might try to express myself diplomatically. Then again one of the things I most admired about them was their willingness to face things squarely, so maybe they wouldn't need or want kid glove treatment. Anyway, if I were having an extended discussion about Calvinism I think at some point I'd have to indicate how I felt about it, diplomatically perhaps but clearly, just to avoid seeming two-faced later.

So I'm not sure I'd be much less anti-Calvinist than Peterson. The thing is, though, I feel exactly the same way about Mormonism that Peterson and I apparently both feel about Calvinism. Could I say that on Sic et Non without getting called a bigot or something—or banned?

I'm guessing that Peterson didn't make a point of declaring his views in a comment on a Calvinist blog. It's one thing to say what you really think in your own living room, another to express yourself so bluntly as a guest. Should that really make such a big difference, though? I'm not sure I currently live up to this but I would like to be a person who spoke the same way in anyone's living room.
Last edited by Physics Guy on Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11438
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Shulem »

DCP's agreement with Joseph Smith's false Egyptian Explanations is more than an indirect assault against ancient Egypt but is a direct affront to the Egyptian god, Anubis, who is neither a slave or a subordinate to the person in front of him in Facsimile No. 3.

For this reason, I have publicly stated that I believe *think* in my own mind that DCP is a racist and continues to support the racist Explanation that was first printed in the Times and Seasons in 1842 wherein Smith takes it upon himself to label the Egyptian god as a slave with a fictitious name of his own making.

Smith thought it appropriate to hack off the snout of the Egyptian jackal god, but this twisted and covert act was an evil effort to mutilate and disparage the sacred papyrus wherein Smith showed a total lack of regard or respect for things he knew absolutely nothing about. DCP supports the racist acts committed by Smith in hacking off the nose but leaving the dog ear atop the head of the so-called slave.

I find both Smith and DCP to be reprehensible -- liars. Both are racist and deceitful-- hardly fit for a so-called celestial kingdom where honest and true hearts would reside.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6361
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Philo Sofee »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:52 am
Is Steven Smoot related to Abraham Smoot? That might explain a lot.

- Doc
Yes it was his great grandfather......
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Dr Moore »

Physics Guy wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 10:09 am
I'm not sure i currently live up to this but I would like to be a person who spoke the same way in anyone's living room.
A worthy comment for me to reflect upon this Father’s Day.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6361
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Philo Sofee »

Physics Guy
So I'm not sure I'd be much less anti-Calvinist than Peterson. The thing is, though, I feel exactly the same way about Mormonism that Peterson and I apparently both feel about Calvinism. Could I say that on Sic et Non without getting called a bigot or something—or banned?
An excellent point which would demonstrate the inconsistency of the Mormon stance. But yes, you most certainly would be called a bigot and banned. I can prophesy here.....now......in the sacred name of Louis Midgley Elohim Jr., that you would be slammed, denigrated, your education questioned, and your relatives mocked were you to say something to that effect. Because.......they would take it personally, as they always do. I mean, in their eyes, it is their future Mormon promised godhead you are threatening! They don't take that lying down, they take you to the woodshed by lying about anything they can about you. They will even begin keeping a file on you.......
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10218
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Lemmie »

moksha wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 6:36 pm
I've been repeatedly asked to challenge Dr. Scratch on the contention that Dr. Peterson denigrates the beliefs of other faith traditions. I get to roll the dice first and so my opening proposition is that Dr. Peterson never denigrates the beliefs of others or advances the claim that the LDS Church is the world's only true religion.

Your turn (others can join in too with affirmative or negative arguments and evidence). It would be a real treat if the denizens of the Sic et Non blog could pop in to lend support to this proposition. Remember, as with any good educational debate you can argue both sides of the proposition.
Has Midgley decided to run interference for his friend in this challenge by denigrating as many beliefs as possible?

Louis Midgley Laralee Nelson • an hour ago • edited

Well, if you had a powerful secular backer much needed to defend against the Austrians and the French, even the leaders of the Evangelical/Lutheran version of the Protestant Reformation would make an exception and allow a bit of polygamy to gratify a "rutting" Prince.

http://disq.us/p/2a2ow06

Louis Midgley • 35 minutes ago

Those naughty Anabaptists rejected infant baptism, and hence required rebaptism for all communicants, which explains their name. Everyone--that is, both Lutheran, aka Evangelicals, and Roman Catholics, thought that this was taking change too far, so the Anabaptists were caught in the middle of factions busy making war on each other.

http://disq.us/p/2a2pxxj
Although the “rutting” Prince comment does bring up some interesting questions. Does Midgley also think that polygamy was instigated by the Mormon religion in order to accommodate the “rutting” of certain leaders? He must, if his argument holds that powerful leaders may need a little leeway with the rules.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22050
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by moksha »

Sledge Moksha • 6 hours ago
Well according to folks here you’ve never once correct or stood up to MSt. Have you?

Moksha Sledge • 15 minutes ago
What do the folk here know about Montana State anyway?

DanielPeterson Mod Sledge • 4 hours ago
He certainly didn't in his so-called "challenge thread."

Moksha DanielPeterson • a few seconds ago
Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by Sic et Non.
I asked in several threads what specific points you wanted covered. The only point I received was that you wanted me to put forth the point that you did not denigrate other faith traditions. I did that. I was asked on that thread to relay any points you might have. I am also willing to do that, but as you point out, I do not make the points as you would make them. Sancho Panza is no substitute for Don Quixote. This would be an opportune time for your supporters to come to your aid on that thread, even if you are reticent to do so yourself.

What say you Band of Peterson Brothers, shall you gird up your loins and sally forth into the so-called "Den of Iniquity" to help defend the honor of Daniel C. Peterson? Ride boldly ride, if you seek such vindication. Let this be a time of bravery and apologetic glory! Onward to the gates of Shadedom for Dan!!!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11438
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Shulem »

moksha wrote:
Sat Jun 20, 2020 6:36 pm
Dr. Peterson denigrates the beliefs of other faith traditions.
denigrate
1: to attack the reputation of : DEFAME
2: to deny the importance or validity of : BELITTLE

DCP, promotes the so-called inspired revelations given by Joseph Smith that the Book of Abraham is the word of God, scripture.

DCP and the Facsimile NO. 3 Explanation denigrates the character of Fig. 6, in mutilating his face, chopping off his nose, and perverting the true meaning of the hieroglyphic caption that designates the character and station of the person below. This is a prime example of defaming the character of another.

DCP and the Facsimile NO. 3 Explanation denigrates the character of Fig. 6, with racial defamation in maintaining that a dark skinned person is a slave. This is a prime example of belittling the character of another.

The only kind of person that stands by Joseph Smith's false revelation that the god Anubis is a slave are racially biased people such as DCP. Hence, DCP is a racist and denigrates an Egyptian god in defaming his image and character -- moreover by belittling his divine station of godhood in classifying him as a slave.

You're disgusting, DCP! Disgusting. So also is Joseph Smith.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22050
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by moksha »

I cannot be a conduit that Everybody Wang Chung requested, after all. Dr. Peterson banished me till Wednesday.
Goodbye until Wednesday at noon, Moksha!

Until then, comments that you continue to make here will be placed in the spam folder for possible release at that time.
Since my call to arms will be unseen by the elders of Sic et Non, perhaps the matter will be dropped.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4962576497
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22050
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:48 pm
The only kind of person that stands by Joseph Smith's false revelation that the god Anubis is a slave are racially biased people such as DCP.
Not sure that is racism as much as self-preservation. If Dr. Peterson were to admit that Joseph made up the translation on the facsimiles, he could be banished by the Stake President on Father's Day for a month of Wednesdays. Besides, he truly believes that it was a slave who should not have been masquerading as Anubis in the first place. Have that slave's food rations placed in the spam folder!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 4:38 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Physics Guy »

Louis Midgley wrote:Well, if you had a powerful secular backer much needed to defend against the Austrians and the French, even the leaders of the Evangelical/Lutheran version of the Protestant Reformation would make an exception and allow a bit of polygamy to gratify a "rutting" Prince.
Midgley is alluding to Philip of Hesse, whose bigamous marriage Martin Luther famously proposed to handle with a "plumpe Lüge", a big fat lie.

I make no comment on Midgley's argument, which I haven't followed. I just note that the casual allusion to this episode, notorious in certain circles but those circles are arguably a decent touchstone for "rarefied", is finally something that sounds professorial from Midgley. Maybe he just needs to slow down and check his posts over for syntax more carefully.

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11438
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Challenge to Dr. Scratch

Post by Shulem »

moksha wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:20 pm
Shulem wrote:
Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:48 pm
The only kind of person that stands by Joseph Smith's false revelation that the god Anubis is a slave are racially biased people such as DCP.
Not sure that is racism as much as self-preservation. If Dr. Peterson were to admit that Joseph made up the translation on the facsimiles, he could be banished by the Stake President on Father's Day for a month of Wednesdays. Besides, he truly believes that it was a slave who should not have been masquerading as Anubis in the first place. Have that slave's food rations placed in the spam folder!
If NASCAR can get rid of the Confederate Flag then The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can get rid of the Explanation for Fig. 6, in Facsimile No. 3.

Can the Church step up to the plate and do the right thing?

If people like DCP were to speak out on this issue it might speed the process up some, do you think?

What the Church has done is extremely disrespectful to another religion and DCP has done nothing to turn that around. I'm left to assume he agrees with the opinion of the Church which is on a imminent crash course with respect to Facsimile No. 3.

It's only a matter of time before this finally catches up with the Church and change is mandated from within.

Post Reply