Daniel Peterson, Michael Ash, who am I missing?

Smoot, Hugh Nibley, Jeff Lindsay.

I think Hugh is my least favorite.

Bill Hamblin is mine.

Daniel Peterson is my favourite.

His brand of personal attack apologetics helped me out the church. So for me, he's the best, he's the man!

But my least favourite? I really don't know. I'd pick an amateur apologist for that honour. They have the least amount to lose

all of them. If truth is TRUTH it needs no apology, excuse, or explanation on how we either didn't understand it right or interpreted it wrong.

For me, it has to be Cleon Skousen. He had a huge ego and was absolutely crazy. Much of the ultra conservative movement in LD$ Inc. started with his intellectual (or lack of) bullying. There are still many older Mormons who still worship neon Cleon.

I didn't know Skousen was in the mix, I always thought he was just a total wackadoo.

Wait, I guess they all are, maybe even more of a batshit crazy wackadoo?

I was listening to a John Dehlin podcast with the guy who wrote "In Sacred Loneliness" (Compton) I appreciate his honesty in telling the stories, but listening to him talk and tell of his continued belief, for me was sickening. I had to turn it off. In my mind, he is an apologist also.

Whaaaat? Sounds like an interesting story.

Can you tell this experience in your own original post? I am sure other RFM'ers would love to read.

He took a disliking to my attitude and dogged me about whatever I said. When I wouldn't shut up, he emailed my husband and told him to take control. DH instead found a site for a NY sanitation company run by someone called Dan Peterson. DH posted about how this was appropriate for a mormon shit shover to be involved with a major shit processor.

http://www.ci.durham.nh.us/publicworks/wastewater-division

The Mormon Dan Peterson havested DH's effort and posted it on FARMS to prove how evil RfM and exmos in general can be.

But his effort backfired. Dozens of posters at FARMS laughed and hooted at Danny and he removed the post within a hour or two.

He continued his efforts against by emailing other RfM posters encouraging them to complain about me to admin and have me banned from RfM. The posters instead contacted me and said they backed me and to be strong and not knuckle to the adversary. I'm still here and Dan is no longer allowed on RfM, but I'm sure he lurks like a rat in the rafters.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2016 04:46AM by Cheryl.

Cheryl:
You are the crown jewel of RFM. I've never heard the DP story before. Hilarious, and so appropriate for the mormon BS scooper known as Tapir Dan.

That's an absolutely incredible story, and comical as well. I'd be interested to know when it took place. From what I can gather, 10 or 12 years ago there was no one in the church who really understood exmormons. You'd think that Dan Peterson, with all his knowledge and sophistication, could have done better than that.

Except for providing me the occasional belly laugh, the BYU/FAIR/FARMS brain trust have zero effect on my life. I'm the only person in my circle that pays any attention to what those turkeys have to say.

However, my family member do listen to the apostles <ahem> when they engage in apologetics. Anytime they mention a subject it becomes the last word on it. So I'm going to have to say that Oaks, Holland, and Ballard are not only my least favorite LDS apologists but also among my least favorite human beings.

Robert Millet (BYU) is the worst I think. He has tried so hard to represent LDS theology and doctrine as being close to, almost compatible with, Protestant Christianity. He had lots of dialogue with Christians, including Fuller Seminary in Pasadena......all while grossly misrepresenting Mormon beliefs and words of LDS prophets. Disgraceful....

Truman Madsen.

He wrote what, at the the time, I felt was the most inspiring portrait of the "prophet" Joseph Smith that I had ever read.

Well, Madsen did indeed present some fascinating insights into old Joe's life. Madsen had very obviously done hundreds, perhaps thousands, of hours of research into Smith's life in order to be able to present many of the not-so-commonly-known details about the guy.

I know now that Madsen could not possibly have done all of the research that he did without coming across all sorts of very unflattering anecdotes about his subject. He chose to ignore them and write a hagiography rather than an honest portrayal of the man.

Cleon Skousen - b/c he was one crazy mo fo

Mr. Jowls "thumper" Holland - loved his last Tempe rescue tirade.

Holland & Peterson;


Batman & Robin!

John Gee. He is the Church's main defender of the Book of Abraham and is willing to go beyond obfuscation and into the realm of lying for the Lord. He also did the same in "Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon", when he deliberately mischaracterized Ethan Smith's "View of the Hebrews". I provided him with excerpts to demonstrate his "error" about a decade ago, but he made no effort to correct it. John Gee is a propagandist and a liar.

Great comment. I'll have to check it out.

I was somewhat surprised when I started to read View of the Hebrews. I'd venture to guess that few of those who refer to that book have actually read it. And I've only read parts, including a great summary of the siege of Jerusalem. I do wonder if the Isaiah references are identical or nearly so.

I've got some work to do.

When I was leaving on a mission he was chief of police in SLC.

when I was leaving on a mission Skousen was chief of police in SLC

Those were the days,
Yes they were...

Echo Facsimile 3 -

John Gee is a bastard of the worst kind. He uses his education at Yale as THE reason why everyone should 'believe' what HE he says. He has confused the science of Egyptology with his miserable writings severely distorting the former. He has sold out himself, Yale, Robert K. Ritner (former mentor who has essentially disavowed himself of his association with Gee) and essentially the organization that he tries to defend - TSCC.

It is so damn ironic that TSCC places so much emphasis on 'light' and 'truth' and yet it wallows in never ending lies and deceptions. And I think this is why people are leaving in droves. TSCC can't have it both ways.

+1

There's a poster by the name of mentalgymnast on a couple of exmo boards. He is so obnoxious in his posts that I really think he is a troll trying to hurt the church while pretending to be an apologist.

I have no respect for any of them. Mr. P in particular along with his cohorts. They are a bunch of degenerates, in my opinion. They are playing a game with gullible people and laughing at how stupid they are.

Spot on. Peterson is playing some sort of academic/intellectual game that only a few of his pals understand. But everyone else is supposed to be impressed.

I even thought his response to Hitchens was competent and on topic. But the condescension oozing and dripping from his presentation was unmistakable.

Danny is my "favorite" - i.e., my LEAST favorite.

I once wrote to another apologist, with regard to an issue I was thinking about.

Danny intercepted my email, and answered it for him, and insulted me in the process.

The nerve!!

Most people wait until they know me better before insulting me.

I noticed no one here mentioned Sorensen (unless I overlooked it), the originator of the 'Tapirs were the Nephite Horses' theory. Having read some of his stuff, I can see he is awful. So is that guy who went to Yale, and his own academic advisor wrote him off because the stuff he wrote has so off-base (Skousen?)

Every Apologist drivel I've read are full of straw men, full of ad hominem, and, worst of all, and most consistently, resort to confirmation bias to 'prove' just about everything they right about. Also, like others have mentioned above, some of the worst apologist offenders writings are just DRIPPING with condescension and passive-aggressive attacks at the authors. I remember reading a wholesale condemnation of this site by someone who made some comment about how everyone here takes the word of a 'cartoonist' as gospel, clearly a condescending, snarky attack directed toward Steve Benson, who has forever damaged the credibility of the church and certain Apostles. So I guess being a journalist and artist of editorial cartoonist isn't beneath you, you high-handed, arrogant apologist fuck?


Apologists need to take a little tip; if it comes from the standard works, it cannot be used as proof. Nothing in the Book of Mormon, the Bible (as a good rule of thumb, anyway), the D&C and the PoGP can be used as 'evidence' for anything else, and yet I see this consistently used in the most amateurish of apologetic writings.

I didn't mean to resurrect a 2nd page thread but I wanted to comment on this, if for no other reason than to vent my spleen and mock apologists. They are no doubt off doing the same thing on their own forums, blogs, and message boards, masturbating with self-satisfaction after their own vigorous, Freudian deconstruction of why we're all exmormons and failures as human beings



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2016 11:10PM by midwestanon.