Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Joey wrote:That makes very little or no sense if, as you have claimed, the Book of Mormon is an accurate translation of an ancient and original source describing an ancient people. It should be drawing a huge, significant and overwhelming interest from the very same secular academic community who devote lifetimes studying ancient histories and societies! After all, doesn't this claimed history and people date back to about fourteen hundred years ago as well???

While your statement lacks any intellectual foundation, I do believe it has a very significant purpose for LDS church firesides

This comment illustrates fairly clearly why I don't bother responding to Joey.
_Joey
_Emeritus
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:34 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _Joey »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
Joey wrote:That makes very little or no sense if, as you have claimed, the Book of Mormon is an accurate translation of an ancient and original source describing an ancient people. It should be drawing a huge, significant and overwhelming interest from the very same secular academic community who devote lifetimes studying ancient histories and societies! After all, doesn't this claimed history and people date back to about fourteen hundred years ago as well???

While your statement lacks any intellectual foundation, I do believe it has a very significant purpose for LDS church firesides

This comment illustrates fairly clearly why I don't bother responding to Joey.


What this continues to illustrate is that when the arguments and logic of Peterson and Gardner, are exposed with simple commen sense they fall back to the the only two options left to them:

1). Abandone the discussion

2). Go to character assassination

(If it helps you Dan, I like to fish as much as Michael Coe!)

But seriously, the nonsensical defense that Peterson presented above for the disparity in interest between the Koran and the Book of Mormon had to be pointed out. If Dan believes my response lacks merit - he can respond or fall back on 1 or 2 above.

We know Gardner chose # 1. !!!!
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
_mikwut
_Emeritus
Posts: 1605
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:20 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _mikwut »

Joey,

He did not resort to either your 1 or 2. He gave a cogent and logical response that whether a believer or non-believer reasonable persons would not object to. Your hyper-responsive counter allegations ironically do fall under both your 1 and 2. They abandon the logic inherent in Dr. Peterson's response (which you don't respond to) and they rely on character assassination.

Your tactics don't serve a critical examination of Mormonism in any healthy way, they in fact disrupt such an examination and you should re-think your presentation. If not only for the sake of interesting conversation - but more importantly the real truth.

my best regards,

mikwut
All communication relies, to a noticeable extent on evoking knowledge that we cannot tell, all our knowledge of mental processes, like feelings or conscious intellectual activities, is based on a knowledge which we cannot tell.
-Michael Polanyi

"Why are you afraid, have you still no faith?" Mark 4:40
_Joey
_Emeritus
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:34 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _Joey »

mikwut wrote:Joey,

He did not resort to either your 1 or 2. He gave a cogent and logical response that whether a believer or non-believer reasonable persons would not object to. Your hyper-responsive counter allegations ironically do fall under both your 1 and 2. They abandon the logic inherent in Dr. Peterson's response (which you don't respond to) and they rely on character assassination.

Your tactics don't serve a critical examination of Mormonism in any healthy way, they in fact disrupt such an examination and you should re-think your presentation. If not only for the sake of interesting conversation - but more importantly the real truth.

my best regards,

mikwut


I strongly dissagree with your rationale and conclusion. My points are extreamely valid and cogent. I had thought Dan could speak for himself, but it appears he chose to abandon the merits of the issue again. Good you're here to speak for him though.
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _moksha »

An important point to note is that neither Solomon Spalding nor Sydney Rigdon had any acquaintance with Muhammad. Sand Rantings Found was simply not a factor and even Uncle Dale would most likely agree with this assessment.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _Ceeboo »

moksha wrote:An important point to note is that neither Solomon Spalding nor Sydney Rigdon had any acquaintance with Muhammad. Sand Rantings Found was simply not a factor and even Uncle Dale would most likely agree with this assessment.




:)

Love the penguin!


Peace,
Ceeboo
_Joey
_Emeritus
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:34 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _Joey »

mikwut wrote:
Your tactics don't serve a critical examination of Mormonism in any healthy way, they in fact disrupt such an examination and you should re-think your presentation. If not only for the sake of interesting conversation - but more importantly the real truth.

mikwut


Mikwut,

Let's not forget that this has nothing to do with Mormonism. It has to do with the claims made by LDS apologists with respect to an issue of "scholarship"!! Peterson and Gardner have attempted to claim that such "scholarship" meets whatever they perceive acceptance levels for academic acceptance. I merely demonstrated that they seek recognition in the isolated and insulated confines of Provo and BYU. Hence unlike the Koran and Bible, secular scholars find absolutely no reason to have interest in the historical claims of the Book of Mormon.

Peterson has provided no raesonable not intellectual argument to defend this void of interest. So he, as he has done in the past, chooses to abandon the conversation when called on it!

Rather simple to see actually!
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
_mikwut
_Emeritus
Posts: 1605
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:20 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _mikwut »

Joey,

Let's not forget that this has nothing to do with Mormonism. It has to do with the claims made by LDS apologists with respect to an issue of "scholarship"!!


Well of course it has a lot to do with Mormonism. "Scholarship", "Peer-review", etc.. are semantical and side issues that shouldn't concern the reasonable inquiry or examination. I've read a lot of scholarship and it meets the eyeball test, the rigor test and the substance test for me. What the real issue and center issue should be is that whatever adjective you use, it is the very best arguments Mormonism presents, and Dr. Peterson and Mr. Gardner belong to those that present some of the best arguments. The minor attacks of "scholarship" and why the secular scientific community doesn't pump millions of dollars into research and investigation (although nearly an obvious reality to most educated people) no matter how answered still leaves Dr. Peterson's and Mr. Gardner's arguments to be answered and properly assessed. That's why I find the irony in your criticism. It runs from the real substance of their work, evidence and arguments yet you claim it is they who is running. Let's be real, even if everyone agreed with you - you haven't answered, critiqued, weighed or properly analyzed anything. It's mere rhetoric. It is of such minor importance to be trivial.

Peterson has provided no raesonable not intellectual argument to defend this void of interest.


Beside the fact that he just did in this thread, the near obvious nature of the answer he has provided many times. Regarding the nearly trivial nature of the "defense of the void of interest" he has also provided much more attention than what such a question deserves.
my regards, mikwut
All communication relies, to a noticeable extent on evoking knowledge that we cannot tell, all our knowledge of mental processes, like feelings or conscious intellectual activities, is based on a knowledge which we cannot tell.
-Michael Polanyi

"Why are you afraid, have you still no faith?" Mark 4:40
_emilysmith
_Emeritus
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 10:16 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _emilysmith »

Is there any direct evidence of Mohammed's life? Or is it much like Jesus, where we have no first hand accounts?

edit: The main problem I have encountered is the unwillingness of people in the Muslim world to engage this subject with any degree of objectivity. One might assume that the "overwhelming" opinion is an extension of the entire region to be uncooperative to anyone who may possess a contrary view.

Even simple questions have earned me death threats from Muslims on Facebook. The explicit nature of of how they planned to punish me was even worse in some other places, and I hadn't even come close to sharing the most conflicting opinion that Mohammed didn't even write the Quran.
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: Dr. Daniel C. Peterson, Who wrote the Koran?

Post by _DrW »

emilysmith wrote:edit: The main problem I have encountered is the unwillingness of people in the Muslim world to engage this subject with any degree of objectivity. One might assume that the "overwhelming" opinion is an extension of the entire region to be uncooperative to anyone who may possess a contrary view.

Even simple questions have earned me death threats from Muslims on Facebook. The explicit nature of of how they planned to punish me was even worse in some other places, and I hadn't even come close to sharing the most conflicting opinion that Mohammed didn't even write the Quran.


Having been in business in Abu Dhabi with a US educated member of a relatively prominent local family, and having spent time in his home and on long drives through the desert at night, I have perhaps a little different take on how many Muslims really view their religion.

Unlike the situation that Emily reports (which I have no doubt is absolutely accurate), this colleague was not particularly sensitive or unwilling to talk about religion (after some mutual trust was built).

He divided his world according to "traditional" life and "modern" life. In traditional life, he wore the traditional thobe (distasha in UAE) and ghutra, generally prayed 4 times a day (not the obligatory 5 times) and really did not care how the Koran came to be, but let the mullahs and imams worry about that.

In the "modern" life, he wore a suit and tie, spoke at least 4 languages fluently, and made a ton of money because of his position as a smart and highly educated "local" working for French Total. His son vacationed with our family at Lake Powell (where there were unrelated teenage girls in swimsuits).

In this mode (usually when in France, the US or the UK) he did not generally pray during the day, expressed belief in (and showed a sophisticated understanding of) evolution, and wondered aloud if the Gulf Arabs would "get it" before their oil resources ran out and they went back to herding camels (his words, not mine).

The version of how the Q'uran came to be with which he agreed was that it was received by Muhammad, through the angel Gabriel, in bits and pieces over a period of some 20 years, was carried on by oral tradition, and not really written down as a combined work until after the death of Muhammad. Islam is very decentralized and fragmented. There is no Pope or president. Nobody is really in charge except within individual countries. There are more than a dozen recognized versions of the Q'uran.

While there are clearly Muslims who would kill infidels who they believed were insulting Islam, there are also many who know deep down that traditional Islam is BS and simply play the game when in country in order to get along (sort of like NOMs).

Living for years at a time in both the Kingdom and the Emirates, I was often struck by the many similarities between Mormonism and Islam, as well as the variety of ways that those who were born into these religions (he and I included) coped with this unfortunate circumstance.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
Post Reply