The Interpreter Radio Show
-
_Dr Exiled
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 3616
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:48 am
Re: The Interpreter Radio Show
He's clearly speaking to the faithful. As Res Ipsa points out, no atheist, if any, will doubt their doubts and go back to believing fairy tails, regardless of anything Dr. P says online or in any book. He is messaging the faithful that the battle is joined. They can take comfort in knowing that Dr. P is on the wall, looking for targets for his grenade(s), with his trusty senior warrior Midge by his side and Kiwi57 there to bring water to the troops. Their defense to the indefensible probably causes more damage than good if the questioning members actually read what the defenders say. However, there is power in being able to point to a book here or a website there that has "answers" even if the "answers" are poor answers.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen
-
_Most High
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 6:41 am
Re: The Interpreter Radio Show
I listened to the interpreter radio show: https://interpreterfoundation.org/inter ... t-30-2020/
Most of the show was like listening in to a bunch of Trumpist discussing conspiracy theories combined with the participants cheering on Dan as their "spiritual Porter Rockwell".
What suprised me was that Dan Peterson shared some insights regarding the Joshia Stowell (unintended early "golden plates" witness) encounter with Joseph Smith jr on the eve of his return with the golden plates. In Dans comment he showed that not only does he conflate a series of different and contradictory reports of the event into one seemingly coherent story, but he also showed that he has not read the actual source documents resulting in him promulgating historical errors.
The accounts that he conflates are the written statement from the 1830 court case, Lucys statement and Tiffany and Campbells later third hand recollections.
The most serious mistake he makes is where he claims with fervent voice that "Stowell had claimed to see the golden leaves and characters on the leaves" in the encounter.
While wishful thinking, this is a blatantly false statement based on a superficial glance of the source documents.
This is what Stowell actually describes (not very faith promoting in my eyes):
"..witness saw a corner of it; it resembled a stone of a greenish caste; should judge it to have been about one foot square and six inches thick..".
(http://user.xmission.com/~research/early/court1830.htm)
Then is added in the text:
"..it was unknown to Smith, that witness saw a corner of the Bible, so called by Smith; told the witness the leaves were of gold; there were written characters on the leaves.."
It is JSjr that tells Josiah Stowell that there were leaves with characters, Joshia only saw the corner of a greenish stone wrapped in cloth.
Dan Peterson wants to include what Joseph Smith jr told Joshia Stowell about the plates, as if Joshia Stowell himself said that.
While others claim that Peterson has no integrity, I think that he does, and I am sure that he will clear up this little misunderstanding in his next radio show.
Most of the show was like listening in to a bunch of Trumpist discussing conspiracy theories combined with the participants cheering on Dan as their "spiritual Porter Rockwell".
What suprised me was that Dan Peterson shared some insights regarding the Joshia Stowell (unintended early "golden plates" witness) encounter with Joseph Smith jr on the eve of his return with the golden plates. In Dans comment he showed that not only does he conflate a series of different and contradictory reports of the event into one seemingly coherent story, but he also showed that he has not read the actual source documents resulting in him promulgating historical errors.
The accounts that he conflates are the written statement from the 1830 court case, Lucys statement and Tiffany and Campbells later third hand recollections.
The most serious mistake he makes is where he claims with fervent voice that "Stowell had claimed to see the golden leaves and characters on the leaves" in the encounter.
While wishful thinking, this is a blatantly false statement based on a superficial glance of the source documents.
This is what Stowell actually describes (not very faith promoting in my eyes):
"..witness saw a corner of it; it resembled a stone of a greenish caste; should judge it to have been about one foot square and six inches thick..".
(http://user.xmission.com/~research/early/court1830.htm)
Then is added in the text:
"..it was unknown to Smith, that witness saw a corner of the Bible, so called by Smith; told the witness the leaves were of gold; there were written characters on the leaves.."
It is JSjr that tells Josiah Stowell that there were leaves with characters, Joshia only saw the corner of a greenish stone wrapped in cloth.
Dan Peterson wants to include what Joseph Smith jr told Joshia Stowell about the plates, as if Joshia Stowell himself said that.
While others claim that Peterson has no integrity, I think that he does, and I am sure that he will clear up this little misunderstanding in his next radio show.