Church Leaders Chastised John Gee and Daniel C. Peterson

[Everybody Wang Chung]

It is being reported that John Gee and Daniel C. Peterson were both recently called down to the COB and “yelled” at for John Gee’s article on the Joseph Smith Papers.

Starts at the 1:58 minute mark:

https://radiofreemormon.org/2021/03/rad ... s-project/


On Spotify, it starts at the 117:50 mark:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/51wr9W ... Imi2Xl4guG

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Is that 1:58 or 2 hrs and 38 mins?

[Manetho]

If this is true, all I can say is "LOL."

I came to this whole subject out of an interest in Egyptology, not out of any connection at all with Mormonism, and I don't know all the ins and outs of the world of Mormon apologetics. But it really does seem to me that Gee's efforts relating to the Book of Abraham have backfired in every way.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Is that 1:58 or 2 hrs and 38 mins?

Sorry, 1 hour and 58 minutes.

[Shulem]

If this is true, all I can say is "LOL."

I came to this whole subject out of an interest in Egyptology, not out of any connection at all with Mormonism, and I don't know all the ins and outs of the world of Mormon apologetics. But it really does seem to me that Gee's efforts relating to the Book of Abraham have backfired in every way.

Oh, it backfired on Gee since day one. The Missing Roll Theory is a paradox when taking into consideration that this ridiculous excuse can't be applied to Smith's translations of Facsimile No. 3. We have all of the hieroglyphic text in Facsimile No. 3 as contained in the registers. None of it was lost in the Chicago fire. There is no missing text from Facsimile No. 3!

We see exactly what Smith translated and we know he couldn't translate Egyptian. Isn't that right, John?

The very text in the registers of Facsimile No. 3 and the translations and interpretations of that text by Smith blows the Missing Roll Theory out of the water!

[Doctor Scratch]

Classic. This isn't the first time that Dr. Peterson has been scolded/"spanked" by the Brethren. And notice that he hasn't lifted a finger to deny that this happened.

[IHAQ]

Have they removed the piece Gee did criticising the JSP?

[Doctor Scratch]

Have they removed the piece Gee did criticising the JSP?

Nope. Nor has there been any "correction" or editing of the pieces--at least, not as far as I can tell.

[Philo Sofee]

It is being reported that John Gee and Daniel C. Peterson were both recently called down to the COB and “yelled” at for John Gee’s article on the Joseph Smith Papers.

Starts at the 1:58 minute mark:

https://radiofreemormon.org/2021/03/rad ... s-project/


On Spotify, it starts at the 117:50 mark:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/51wr9W ... Imi2Xl4guG

That was a VERY ENLIGHTENING podcast!!! Thanks for the headsup. I listened to all 188 minutes in one setting! STUNNING the incredible chutzpah of Peterson and Gee. LOL!!!!!! Two clowns. Two clowns named Peterson and Midgley now need to get a roughing up behind closed doors. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if that has already happened. Poor Gee. What a dweeb! Oh my! That poor man, what a complete waste of life, and then to get abandoned......just WOW...... abandoned by the church he defended until they had gotten their use out of him. I am so GRATEFUL I no longer am an apologist...... so SERIOUSLY grateful!

[Doctor Scratch]

<Ahem> Please pardon me; it would seem that I spoke too soon. The posting is classic, tone-deaf, insensitive DCP. He opens with a rather moving and seemingly heartfelt account of attending a funeral earlier today. He even notes some musical numbers that he would like to be played at his own funeral--traveling music, I suppose, as he makes his way up to the heaven depicted in Added Upon. But, then three asterisks ("***") mark an extreme change in thought, and we're left with the jarring juxtaposition of this solemn and mournful reflection of a dead friend, with "dirty" Mopologetic gossip:

I’ve just been alerted to a claim being made online that, as a result of a pair of critical reviews of The Joseph Smith Papers, Revelations and Translations, Volume 4: Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts, eds. Robin Scott Jensen and Brian M. Hauglid (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2018) that we published by the Interpreter Foundation back in 2019– the two reviews in question are Jeff Lindsay’s “A Precious Resource with Some Gaps” and John Gee’s “The Joseph Smith Papers Project Stumbles” — John Gee and I were summoned to the Church Office Building in Salt Lake City, where unidentified Church leaders “yelled” at us because of our offense.

This claim is misleading in important ways.

It is true that certain people connected with the Historical Department of the Church were not happy about those two critical reviews — who loves to be negatively reviewed? — and it is true that John Gee and I met (entirely willingly) with a couple of the principal figures in the Joseph Smith Papers project to talk about the reviews.

Good grief! Can't some days be just for reflection? Can a person spend just *one day* acting like a normal human being, and taking a break from Mopologetics and instead celebrating a life that's passed? I guess not, because he goes on:

But the meeting took place in the Church Historical Library, not in the Church Office Building. No leaders of the Church were involved (assuming that, by “Church leaders,” General Authorities of the Church are intended). And there was absolutely no “yelling.” It was an entirely civil conversation, conducted entirely in conversational tones of voice. One misunderstanding that needed to be clarified was that the criticisms in the two reviews were directed solely at certain aspects of that fourth volume, not at the entire volume, and certainly not at the Joseph Smith Papers project as a whole (let alone at the Church or at its leaders).

This is a straight-up admission that they'd plotted a direct smear campaign against Brian Hauglid, and possibly Jensen as well. But as other have noted, this *does* also mean that they are impugning the judgment of the people who tapped Hauglid and Jensen to do this. There really is no escaping that basic point, especially given the Church's top-down power structure. And bear in mind that, if they truly did object to the material in that volume, there were lots of other avenues/channels they could have explored prior to publishing Gee's two "hit pieces." They don't think that someone with Hauglid's views should be allowed anywhere near the JSPP, except they don't have the courage to simply call him an "apostate" in public. And yet, for some reason, they appear to have compunctions about ratting him out to the GAs, or his SP, or whoever else.

However, as a matter of fact, I have never been rebuked by any General Authority of the Church, nor by any combination of General Authorities. Never.

I hope that’s clear enough.

Not true. The most obvious example, of course, was the expulsion of "Classic FARMS" from the Maxwell Institute. But there were multiple other occasions, of course--often in the form of phone calls from Salt Lake City. So, I guess this is all about the way one defines "rebuke"?