DCP's interviews on Mormonstories

[_LDS truthseeker]

I am surprised that there isn't more discussion on THIS board about Daniel Peterson's interviews on Mormonstories. They are available here: http://mormonstories.org/?p=1904

I have just started to listen to the first podcast so I'll reserve any specific comments for later, but a couple observations and questions.

1) I'd like to express a hearty thanks to DCP for having the guts to go on Mormonstories. So far it seems to be one of the more interesting podcasts.

2) DCP, I know they have been wanting you on the podcast for some time. Did having an interviewer other than John Dehlin influence your decision as you have known the guy that interviewed you for some 10 years? Would you still have gone on if John Dehlin was the interviewer?

3) Will you consider going on John Larson's Mormon Expression some time? I personally like to see balance. I enjoyed Jeff Lindsay's interview they did.

4) I always listen to the podcasts instead of the videos as it's more convenient. Other than your smiling face, am I missing anything by just listening to the podcasts instead of watching the videos?

4) Lastly, and most importantly. I get a totally different sense of you on the podcast than I do reading your posts and occasionally sparring with you on the boards over the years.
Maybe it's the antagonisitic nature of the boards that unfortunately seem to label people by what side they are on , but you come across much nicer and more personable on the podcasts. I think everyone should see this kinder, gentler DCP.

[_Buffalo]

DCP is currently in hiding so he doesn't have to answer the tough questions in the Book of Abraham thread.

That thread may be what DCP has been looking for to break his online forum addiction.

[_Jason Bourne]

I have it on my ipod and will listen to it as soon as I finish the Michael Coe interview.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I'm not in hiding. I will answer "the tough questions in the Book of Abraham thread," though probably not here and probably not for a while. I will, however, post a notice here when I've done so.

It's long been obvious that significant participation here on this board has not been worth my effort. Too much nonsense and static. Too many personal insults. Too small an audience, too, frankly -- and a remarkably hostile one. And, of course, I've had enough, and more than enough, of Scratch's malignant and bizarre fantasies about me. There's no hope that he'll abandon them or give up his crusade to defame me, so there seems no point in continuing to reply to him. I doubt, anyway, that more than a handful -- even here -- actually find him persuasive (though I could, obviously, be wrong about that).

Also, as I said I would be a few weeks ago, I've been in an extremely busy time for the past three weeks or so, and often away from home. And, this week, it's meeting after meeting after meeting. I've already been in two so far today. (I had four yesterday.) I have another one at 2 PM that will probably extend until roughly 5 PM, and I have a third at 7 PM. Tomorrow, I have a crucial meeting in Salt Lake City at 10 AM -- that should put Scratch's imagination into overdrive, though the meeting, while important, is nothing really dramatic and isn't with Church leaders or employees -- and a start-of-the-year department meeting that will take most of the afternoon thereafter, and then I leave to spend a few nights elsewhere (for, among other things, a family wedding and reception).

Owing to my enforced absence from the board, and to the peculiar character of this specific season -- the beginning of a new academic year -- this seems a good period to resolve to cut my participation back here to a bare minimum (e.g., advertising new publications). And even that will probably become less worthwhile to me as certain other venues open up.

But LDS truthseeker has raised a couple of issues worthy of a response and easy to respond to, so I'll respond.

I am surprised that there isn't more discussion on THIS board about Daniel Peterson's interviews on Mormonstories. They are available here: http://mormonstories.org/?p=1904

I have just started to listen to the first podcast so I'll reserve any specific comments for later, but a couple observations and questions.

1) I'd like to express a hearty thanks to DCP for having the guts to go on Mormonstories. So far it seems to be one of the more interesting podcasts.

Thank you.

2) DCP, I know they have been wanting you on the podcast for some time. Did having an interviewer other than John Dehlin influence your decision as you have known the guy that interviewed you for some 10 years? Would you still have gone on if John Dehlin was the interviewer?

I'm not scared of John Dehlin, if that's what you're wondering. Yes, he had been asking me, and I never told him no. I just wasn't highly motivated to do it, was probably even slightly disinclined, and have had little time. (The interview, along with all the before-and-after preparations and travel time for me probably cost me about six hours. I seldom have six such hours.)

Dan Wotherspoon has been a friend for roughly ten years, though. And we've worked together on a few things. Also, he had just recently helped me -- voluntarily, and very effectively -- in the practical preparations for the annual meeting of the Society for Mormon Philosophy and Theology. I had gotten myself into a serious bind, and his assistance was invaluable.

So, while I scarcely know John Dehlin -- I think we've met once, and I wouldn't recognize him on the street -- Dan Wotherspoon is a friend, and I felt that I owed him, big time. So I said Yes.

3) Will you consider going on John Larson's Mormon Expression some time? I personally like to see balance. I enjoyed Jeff Lindsay's interview they did.

John asked me once, a year or more ago, and I told him that I was, in principle, quite willing. I don't think we've spoken of it since. With me, it's always (at a minimum) a question of time.

4) I always listen to the podcasts instead of the videos as it's more convenient. Other than your smiling face, am I missing anything by just listening to the podcasts instead of watching the videos?

No. Nothing. Except, of course, my sheer physical beauty.

4) Lastly, and most importantly. I get a totally different sense of you on the podcast than I do reading your posts and occasionally sparring with you on the boards over the years.
Maybe it's the antagonisitic nature of the boards that unfortunately seem to label people by what side they are on , but you come across much nicer and more personable on the podcasts. I think everyone should see this kinder, gentler DCP.

That's the real me. But please don't tell anybody. Shock and awe -- that's what I'm going for.

I don't really have much to worry about, though, because I'm reasonably confident that, five years from now, Scratch will still be painting me as an unprincipled villain, much the way he's been doing now for the past five years. It seems to be his principal reason for existence.

[_Buffalo]

I'm not in hiding. I will answer "the tough questions in the Book of Abraham thread," though probably not here and probably not for a while. I will, however, post a notice here when I've done so.

I'm sure you're just going to wait for that missing papyrus to show up. Then, when it's found by Egyptologists to contain the Book of Abraham text in its entirety, you'll be able to address those challenging questions to the authenticity of the Book of Abraham and your own flawed defense of it in the past. I'm also sure that your withdrawal from the forum has nothing to do with the timing of that rather difficult thread. :)

We'll all be here in the cesspool/trailer park/*insert denigrating placeholder here*, holding our breath.

Cool interview though. Very enjoyable.

[_RayAgostini]

for what it's worth, here's what Craig Paxton, a very vocal and long time critic of Mormonism, had to say about the interview:

MDDB

For those unable to view MDDB:

Just like the puppeteer in the movie “Being John Malkovich”, I feel like I’ve just found the secret portal into the mind of Dr. Daniel Peterson. While I’m only ¾ of the way through your interview I do have some initial thoughts based on what I’ve heard so far.

01. Prior to listening to the pod-cast I imagined you as a self-absorbed, pompous arss. I mean come on…you did after all choose as your aviator the Flash Gordon character “Ming the Merciless”, the equivalent of a 1930’s Darth Vader. But after listening to the pod-cast, I’m happy to publically state (if posting here is considered public) that I was wrong. Dr. Peterson comes across as a warm, fuzzy, loving, compassionate, teddy bear, Ok I’m exaggerating but I am willing to modify my admitingly pre-conceived impression. ..I now see Dr. Peterson as a knowledgeable, confident, sincere defender of a religion he deeply believes to be all it claims to be…who is also somewhat self-absorbed. ..but that’s not a bad thing.

Being who you are and doing what you do (as the face of church apologetics) I think you need to have a super ego and be completely confident in who you are and what you believe. There is no room for you to ever show any sign of doubt or question. In your world the church can only be one thing…TRUE. If you didn’t have this confidence in your beliefs and in yourself, your critics would smell the blood in the water and have a field day. I should add that you also come across as articulate, knowledgeable and with an uncanny ability to shape shift Mormonism into something almost believable…well at least for some…and hay isn’t that what you were hired to do?

02. I thought many of your comments were very refreshing and insightful, such as admitting that church apologists start with the conclusion….and work back words to support that preformed conclusion. In other words you don’t let the facts drive your conclusions, you begin with the conclusion and make the facts fit your pre formed conclusion. It was refreshing to hear you admit something that is quite obvious to an outside observer. I should add…that were I in your position I would do the same exact thing. I think it is only obvious that a church apologist MUST start with the premise that the church IS true and find ways to support that proposition. Although this wasn’t a revelation to me it did help me better understand how horses become tapirs and chariot’s become travious.

03. Listening to you on the pod- cast has given me a new found appreciation and respect for you. I sincerely appreciate your willingness to be interviewed on Mormon Stories (although I think John would have asked tougher questions and held your feet to the fire more than Dan did) I believe that you represented the church well and gave me reason to once again bang my head against the wall. Ouch!

PS: I just finished the rest of this pod-cast interview. I have come away with a new appreciation for Dr. Daniel Peterson. He was more pragmatic in his beliefs than I could have ever imagined. I got the sense that he is a very sincere, human,caring and compassionate individual. As someone who has at times been called a church critic, I want to thank Dr. Peterson on doing this interview.

(PS: I didn't think Pahoran's response was in good taste, and entirely missed the spirit of Craig's sincere post.)

[_Doctor Scratch]

Yeah, Ray, I liked Paxton's post quite a lot too. I'm still only halfway through the second podcast, but so far I agree 100% with everything Paxton said. One of the things that really surprised me was DCP's admission that he basically subscribes to the "pay, pray, obey" means of addressing problems with people's testimonies. I had been under the impression that he was more interested in dealing with problems via intellectual means, but per what he said in the interview, it seems instead that his first recourse is to tell people to go pray and read their scriptures.

[_RayAgostini]

Yeah, Ray, I liked Paxton's post quite a lot too. I'm still only halfway through the second podcast, but so far I agree 100% with everything Paxton said. One of the things that really surprised me was DCP's admission that he basically subscribes to the "pay, pray, obey" means of addressing problems with people's testimonies. I had been under the impression that he was more interested in dealing with problems via intellectual means, but per what he said in the interview, it seems instead that his first recourse is to tell people to go pray and read their scriptures.

I viewed all four clips in two sittings, and in my view the last is the best.

He said that at times he was confronted with problems for which he had no solution (mentally ill people, etc.), and received help from his stake president who is a specialist in this area. I don't think he thinks that "pray, pay and obey" is a "solution" in many cases, or the solution in every case. Most bishops are non-specialists in areas of psychiatric counseling, or for that matter marriage counseling (and lots of other things), and thus recognise their limitations. As a young bishop, I was faced with similar problems, and referred more complex cases to LDS Social Services who employed qualified psychologists.

Was I guilty of advocating, too often, the "pray, pay and obey" line? Most assuredly. In fact I was criticised by several members (privately when dealing with them) that my "solution" was too superficial. It's sort of like someone coming to you and saying they have a bad stomach pain, and you reply "well just pay, pray and obey!" Naturally you refer them to a doctor, but also encourage them to pray (for healing) as well. DCP made this point in the interview.

[_LDS truthseeker]

I'm not scared of John Dehlin, if that's what you're wondering.

No, not implying that at all. I have no doubt you can handle yourself with the tough questions. John Lynch and Richard Bushman survived Mr. Dehlin's questions without difficulty, no doubt you can as well. And John's a very fair guy anyway.

John (Larson of Mormon Expression) asked me once, a year or more ago, and I told him that I was, in principle, quite willing. I don't think we've spoken of it since. With me, it's always (at a minimum) a question of time.

He mentioned on a podcast recently that he has an open invitation for you to come on so maybe when you have time. Can't get enough DCP.

That's the real me. But please don't tell anybody. Shock and awe -- that's what I'm going for.

Have to tell. A friend of mine use to work for FARMS and said that you were a really nice guy and very funny.

Too bad these message boards sometimes have the effect of turning good people against each other in such a nasty way when if they might otherwise be civil to each other if they got to know the people – even if they totally disagreed with them on these church issues we so enjoy discussing. Perhaps more posters should go on podcasts and other media to show that not everybody is a villain, just people with differing opinions. I use to think that Sandra Tanner had horns until I met her - she's a very nice old Grandma.

One more question, what is your current avatar from?

[_Patriarchal gripe]

I listened to the interviews in their entirety. I have to say I found them a bit annoying. Dr. Peterson set up one straw man critic after another and knocked them down like the crusader for God that he is. Dan Wotherspoon pitched him one softball question after another, and forgot to field them when they were crushed to deep left field after they were served up.

Also, I have to say that his description of his time as bishop, during his testimony, had me hoping there were less bishops like him in the church. I honestly hope that most bishops don't feel this way about their ward members. About 33 minutes into the last segment he describes those he counciled with in his ward as mentally ill, chronic liars, hypochondriacs, etc. DCP doesn't sound like the kind of bishop you want to go to cap in hand if you need assistance from the church, unless you enjoy being looked down on. Maybe it would have been better if they weren't so poor, and he didn't live higher up the foothills than them.

He has a great voice, though. I could sit and listen to him in class for hours, if I ever lost my mind and decided to go to BYU.