Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑
Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:34 pm
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....
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.
Thanks so much for adding that link to the Third Hour, Pres. Wang Chung. The thread is valuable because it includes commentary from DCP in which he explains why he made the Calvinism remark:
DCP wrote:I imagine that this will show up in some future propaganda item that you publish. Too bad. I thought we were just having a conversation. You made some rather negative comments about my religious beliefs; I have never said a word about yours, but decided that you should realize, at least on this one occasion, that it's a two-way street.
But now that I know that you're playing "gotcha" and looking for ammo for your publications, I'll understand better how to interact with you in the future. (Like, preferably not at all.) My mistake. I should have realized it.
Here's where things actually stand:
I have enormous respect for the intellectual achievement of John Calvin. He was brilliant, and he doesn't deserve the rather negative image (as religious totalitarian, etc.) that he has in certain quarters. He was also a supremely consistent thinker. But I find "Five-Point" Calvinism exceptionally unappealing -- one of the most unattractive religious options on the planet, to be completely candid -- and cannot remotely imagine why anybody would find it "good news." (Well, actually I can figure why some would: I'm reminded of what a prominent Arminian theologian told me one night over dinner: He said that he would think more highly of Calvinism and Calvinist theologians if he had ever met even one who, while professing belief in "unconditional election," didn't believe himself to be among those foreordained to be saved. But, although he had spoken with scores and scores of Calvinist theoreticians, he said he had never met any who were not confident that they were destined for heaven. Hell is for everybody else.) I recall a lengthy conversation with one of cksalmon's fellow Calvinist anti-Mormons some years ago. We were talking about the fact that the majority of those predestined to salvation appeared to be northern Europeans and descendants of northern Europeans. I raised the matter of the Chinese. "Maybe God doesn't like the Chinese," responded the good reverend's wife. I've pondered that remarkable comment for several years now.
Yet I do not write, publish, or edit attacks on Calvinism or Calvinists. The only things I've ever published on the subject have been either positive or, at worst, neutral and explanatory. I participate in no "ministry" to counter Calvinism. I've never picketed any meeting of Calvinists, or opposed the construction of any Calvinist place of worship. I don't go on Calvinist message boards, or any other message boards, to criticize Calvinism.
In response to unprovoked negative remarks about my religious beliefs here on this thread, I for once stated my own personal reaction to Calvinist dogma here, and now one of the saved elite, not content to contemplate my imminent and everlasting torture as among those (probably the vast majority of the human race) foreordained to damnation, evidently intends to use it as a weapon against me in some of the anti-Mormon materials that he produces. And he apparently feels very good about this.
A couple of points:
--Interesting that he's so open at the outset about scoring points. (And IIRC, he wrote this in response to CK Salmon, who operated a publication that the Mopologists regarded as "anti-Mormon.") He's basically saying, "See?? How do you like it!!" And yet, he spends a couple more paragraphs laying out, in more specific detail, the nuanced reasons why he finds Calvinism appalling. So, either this is among the most awful things a person could do, or, instead, it's just a reasonable difference of opinion. You wonder why it's okay for DCP to write this, but unacceptable for, e.g., Grant Palmer or Jonathan Neville to make criticisms of either Mormonism, or Mopologetics.
--He writes, "I do not write, publish, or edit attacks on Calvinism or Calvinists." I gather that this was back when he still was trying to make the case that his online activities were just him horsing around, whereas his "actual," legitimate commentary was only to be found in his academic publications. It's worth pointing out that the comment dates back to 2009--before the Mopologists were kicked out of the Maxwell Institute, so this is actually historically interesting. Back then, DCP felt like that BYU imprimatur "protected" him--he could always point to it as evidence that he was connected to this Grand Beacon of the Academy, and it gave him a "shield." *That* was where his real thinking was to be found! But all that went away, and now, of course, his main venue of publication is "Sic et Non." Anyways: I digress. My point was simply that, no, actually, he *does* "write [and] publish" attacks on Calvinism or Calvinists," and indeed, he was doing it in that very post. (Same for the bit about message boards: true, he doesn't go to Calvinist message boards; he went to *that* board, which was either the FAIR message board or MAD at the time.)
"[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