Daniel Peterson Rips It Up

[ALarson]

The response to the letter from the secretary of the First Presidency is, IMO, unacceptable.  I hope if the First Presidency gets wind of this, they send out a more appropriate response.  At the very least point him to someone or to sources of some sort.  I mean its fine that it all comes down to faith and it's fine to point that out, but to brush someone off like that just seems inappropriate. 

As I just posted above, another letter was posted that a questioning member received (June, 2013) and it's quite a different letter.  I could post a link to the letter if it's ok to do so here.  It was written by Steven E. Snow.

[Calm]

" I thought it pertinent to the topic, Dan's hands were tied, he couldn't be honest"

So you ate saying Dan lied?

[ALarson]

" I thought it pertinent to the topic, Dan's hands were tied, he couldn't be honest"

So you ate saying Dan lied?

Back on topic (I think the letter being discussed needs its own thread).

 

I think that Dan misled or just gave the answer that the audience wanted or needed to hear.  He was in a tough spot and was ambushed.  I don't know what I would have done especially considering the youth in attendance.  It's always easy to come up with a good answer in hindsight, but saying this is not truthful (unless Dan believes what he states below):

 

"Now on the polygamy issue.  First of all I would challenge several of those claims.  I think the evidence is pretty conclusive that Joseph was not having sex with most of these women, maybe not with any of them."

Edited April 11, 2014 by ALarson

[Calm]

It seems strange the letter does not mention the recent essays. Why take the time to publish essays on troubling issues if they are not going to be used in situations like this?

Read the letter that was sent in. The man mentions they don't satisfy him.

Given what the letter was saying I think the response was completely appropriate. He obviously already knew the info out there. there is only going to be one thing that can change his mind when someone has reached this state and that is the Spirit.

"I don’t expect you to have answers to my questions. But I did want to let you know out of respect for your position where we stand as a family. The lack of answers to these questions calls into question all the claims of the Church. Until we can find greater clarity to these issues, we will probably be taking a break from church as we contemplate our options....

New statements on LDS.org that attempt to answer some of the top issues that cause members to leave the Church. So far 4 of the rumored 13 have been released. The other 9 are rumored to be released between now and April. These statements offer little help. While they acknowledge some things that were once considered “anti-Mormon lies” they are not authored by anybody in the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve who we are taught are the only ones authorized to introduce new doctrine. They are also filled with half truths. In the case of the article on race, mistakes are acknowledged, but no apology is issued. I was so hopeful when I first heard rumor last year that these issues were to be addressed. Now I feel that if this is the best the Church can come up with, then that may be the last straw."

Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Back on topic (I think the letter being discussed needs its own thread).

 

I think that Dan misled or just gave the answer that the audience wanted or needed to hear.  He was in a tough spot and was ambushed.  I don't know what I would have done especially considering the youth in attendance.  It's always easy to come up with a good answer in hindsight, but saying this is not truthful (unless Dan believes what he states below):

 

"Now on the polygamy issue.  First of all I would challenge several of those claims.  I think the evidence is pretty conclusive that Joseph was not having sex with most of these women, maybe not with any of them."

Dan said already he was sloppy in his answer. Not being completely clear is not the same as not being truthful.

[ALarson]

Read the letter that was sent in. The man mentions they don't satisfy him.

Given what the letter was saying I think the response was completely appropriate. He obviously already knew the info out there. there is only going to be one thing that can change his mind when someone has reached this state and that is the Spirit.

"I don’t expect you to have answers to my questions. But I did want to let you know out of respect for your position where we stand as a family. The lack of answers to these questions calls into question all the claims of the Church. Until we can find greater clarity to these issues, we will probably be taking a break from church as we contemplate our options."

I agree.  But, I believe he really wanted some help or answers.  Here's what the writer of the letter posted as to why he wrote the letter:

 

"I have systematically been going through my priesthood leaders to answer troubling questions about church history and clarify confusing doctrines or positions of the Church. I shared the letter I wrote to my bishop...

My bishop told me that the SP wanted to meet with me. I waited and waited, followed up and waited before realizing several months later that the SP wasn't going to meet with me. Because I still have close friends and family members who are believing I thought it was important to not leave any stone unturned in trying to get answers to many of these tough issues. This way, I could show those people that I exhausted all avenues before leaving the Church. So I finally wrote a letter to Dieter Uchtdorf asking him to either help me understand the answers to my questions or to help me understand how he could maintain belief while still being aware of the issues (referenced Oct 2013 GC talk). I emphasized his role as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator in helping me and many others restore our faith in the Restored Gospel. I was surprised to receive a response and even more surprised by the content of the response."

Edited April 11, 2014 by ALarson

[Calm]

I agree. But, I believe he really wanted some help or answers. Here's what the writer of the letter posted as to why he wrote the letter:

"I have systematically been going through my priesthood leaders to answer troubling questions about church history and clarify confusing doctrines or positions of the Church. I shared the letter I wrote to my bishop...My bishop told me that the SP wanted to meet with me. I waited and waited, followed up and waited before realizing several months later that the SP wasn't going to meet with me. Because I still have close friends and family members who are believing I thought it was important to not leave any stone unturned in trying to get answers to many of these tough issues. This way, I could show those people that I exhausted all avenues before leaving the Church. So I finally wrote a letter to Dieter Uchtdorf asking him to either help me understand the answers to my questions or to help me understand how he could maintain belief while still being aware of the issues (referenced Oct 2013 GC talk). I emphasized his role as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator in helping me and many others restore our faith in the Restored Gospel. I was surprised to receive a response and even more surprised by the content of the response."

Having been involved or observing a number of exchanges over the past decade where answers were provided for these types of lists of questions, evidence imo is very strong that no matter how someone presents their situation, once they've reached this stage of doubt, any answer provided isn't seen as helpful. (I am not saying this guy or others are lying, just that I've seen a variety of ways a similar position is presented.) They have seen the evidence and have chosen to interpret it a particular way. Perhaps they might respond differently if a new revelation was given them, but anything less is not sufficient. I have yet to see one person respond to thoughtful, factual engagement by changing their mind. From stories of a few who see themselves as having reached that stage and one back to faith, it required a change of attitude and approach achieved by a change of heart brought on by a spiritual experience. One may help by being willing to establish a long term relationship where one allows the doubter to share his experiences, but I don't see any GA being in the position of being able to do this. Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[Tacenda]

" I thought it pertinent to the topic, Dan's hands were tied, he couldn't be honest"

So you ate saying Dan lied?

No, but sometimes truth isn't always useful, quoting Pres. Packer.  At that point in time, I feel Dan had to give the milk before the meat, so to speak.  He had to deflect, so as to not gain further questioning or opening up a can of worms.   

[Calm]

He was talking to 11 to 14 year olds. Would you as a parent want him or anyone else to discuss anyone's sex life in detail with them? Or for him to say something that made them curious about the subject so they would likely turn to the Internet for information on the Prophet's sex life?

Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[stemelbow]

Having been involved or observing a number of exchanges over the past decade where answers were provided for these types of lists of questions, evidence imo is very strong that no matter how someone presents their situation, once they've reached this stage of doubt, any answer provided isn't seen as helpful. (I am not saying this guy or others are lying, just that I've seen a variety of ways a similar position is presented.) They have seen the evidence and have chosen to interpret it a particular way. Perhaps they might respond differently if a new revelation was given them, but anything less is not sufficient. I have yet to see one person respond to thoughtful, factual engagement by changing their mind. From stories of a few who see themselves as having reached that stage and one back to faith, it required a change of attitude and approach achieved by a change of heart brought on by a spiritual experience. One may help by being willing to establish a long term relationship where one allows the doubter to share his experiences, but I don't see any GA being in the position of being able to do this.

 

If it was me who posed the questions and sent the letter, I'd feel brushed aside.  I think he did too.  I doubt I'd post responses and stuff on the internet and make a fuss of it, but it happened now.  Just because he's looked into the answers to these questions does not mean he would not benefit from a sincere response from a prophet.  I plain disagree with you.

[Calm]

How would you respond yourself?

Do you think if Pres. Ucthdorf had written him the same letter or passed it on to another GA, it would have been better?

Do you think it would have made a difference in the individual's beliefs given he described this effort as serving the purpose of showing his family he had not left one stone unturned?

Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[Tacenda]

He was talking to 11 to 14 year olds. Would you as a parent want him or anyone else to discuss anyone's sex life in detail with them? Or for him to say something that made them curious about the subject so they would likely turn to the Internet for information on the Prophet's sex life?

I'm with you, there is a time and place for discussing this.   

[stemelbow]

How would you respond yourself?

Do you think if Pres. Ucthdorf had written him the same letter or passed it on to another GA, it would have been better?

Do you think it would have made a difference in the individual's beliefs given he described this effort as serving the purpose of showing his family he had not left one stone unturned?

 

1 - I would probably section off each query and responded directly to it. 

2 - Not really.  If a GA had written something different it would have been better, I'm sure.  The content was the problem in my view.

3 - Who knows?  We'll never know, I guess.  it might not have an immediate impact but it could have an impact down the road, say if this guy or anyone in his family were considering coming back. 

[Tacenda]

1 - I would probably section off each query and responded directly to it. 

2 - Not really.  If a GA had written something different it would have been better, I'm sure.  The content was the problem in my view.

3 - Who knows?  We'll never know, I guess.  it might not have an immediate impact but it could have an impact down the road, say if this guy or anyone in his family were considering coming back. 

I'm wondering what the hold up is on the Essay project.  As someone has already suggested, all one would need to do is direct them to the essay.  But maybe there has been great fallout and it has been reigned in.  Cal?  Do you know why there is a hold up or delay?  Or is there a hold up or delay? 

[CA Steve]

I'm wondering what the hold up is on the Essay project.  As someone has already suggested, all one would need to do is direct them to the essay.  But maybe there has been great fallout and it has been reigned in.  Cal?  Do you know why there is a hold up or delay?  Or is there a hold up or delay? 

As Cal pointed out, the questioner had read the essays and was not satisfied with the responses.

[Calm]

I'm wondering what the hold up is on the Essay project. As someone has already suggested, all one would need to do is direct them to the essay. But maybe there has been great fallout and it has been reigned in. Cal? Do you know why there is a hold up or delay? Or is there a hold up or delay?

they were pretty consistent coming out every few weeks or so till last month. I suspect everything else gets put on hold as they prepare and put out conference but haven't heard anything. I would hope they are less about deadlines and more about getting it right as much as possible. There is a rumour that one topic was put up and taken down in the same day. Can't remember the topic, but if that did happen, it might indicate they've decided to be a bit more cautious so it won't happen again.

Any changes in such an article may spawn a discussion that overtakes the value of the article

Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[ALarson]

As Cal pointed out, the questioner had read the essays and was not satisfied with the responses.

Is his letter posted somewhere to President Uchtdorf?  

 

I know that he mentions the essays in the letter he wrote to his Bishop, but do we know that he told President Uchtdorf that he'd read them and they didn't help?

[Calm]

That is what two hours of sleep does to me, sigh. I just skipped to the body of the email and didn't notice it was the one to his bishop.

I went to the NOM thread and read the first post that does not give what he sent to Pres Ucthdorf. I don't know if it gives it later in the thread..I am debating whether I need to shut off my iPad or not so I may go look further or may not.

Okay, here is my revised answer.

Without knowing what he actually wrote to Pres. Ucthdorf, I don't think there is any way to judge whether or not the response was appropriate or not.

Add-on, still no sign of the actual letter but he describes it as six pages long with many references to the essays.

Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[ALarson]

That is what two hours of sleep does to me, sigh. I just skipped to the body of the email and didn't notice it was the one to his bishop.

I went to the NOM thread and read the first post that does not give what he sent to Pres Ucthdorf. I don't know if it gives it later in the thread..I am debating whether I need to shut off my iPad or not so I may go look further or may not.

Okay, here is my revised answer.

Without knowing what he actually wrote to Pres. Ucthdorf, I don't think there is any way to judge whether or not the response was appropriate or not.

Add-on, still no sign of the actual letter but he describes it as six pages long with many references to the essays.

Calmoriah, I love how fair your comments always are...thanks.

 

I do see now where the poster wrote this about the letter he wrote:

 

"I listed many references to the essays and pointed out the inconsistencies to long held views and teachings of the Church. I am assuming the essays have been abandonded as well."

[CA Steve]

Calmoriah, I love how fair your comments always are...thanks.

 

I do see now where the poster wrote this about the letter he wrote:

 

"I listed many references to the essays and pointed out the inconsistencies to long held views and teachings of the Church. I am assuming the essays have been abandonded as well."

It is clear from the next two posts in that same thread that the poster (FarmerC) has read the essays. In the third post he actually provides links to four of the essays.

[Calm]

And given that the letter was six pages long, I would not be surprised if it had the same detail as the bishop's letter...still it would be nice to see it. I don't know why he wouldn't post it like he did the other one. Perhaps it was identical and he assumes people know that? The length didn't stop him from posting the last one so that doesn't seem an issue.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Dan did not know he was being recorded. The person who did the recording and posted these is NewNameNoah, the same guy who last year went into the temple, recorded the endowment session, and posted it all over the Internet.

 

-Allen

I wonder if those who do such things know they are in violation of the law.

[Daniel Peterson]

I think that Dan misled or just gave the answer that the audience wanted or needed to hear.  . . .   It's always easy to come up with a good answer in hindsight, but saying this is not truthful (unless Dan believes what he states below):

 

"Now on the polygamy issue.  First of all I would challenge several of those claims.  I think the evidence is pretty conclusive that Joseph was not having sex with most of these women, maybe not with any of them."

 

I think I've already addressed this.  (Of course, if the default assumption is that I'm consciously deceptive, that changes things a bit.  Perhaps I can weigh in with my own personal opinion on the matter:  I don't attempt to mislead or deceive, and I resent the suggestion.  Just for the record.)

 

I had the very young wife or wives particularly in mind.  The evidence of marital consummation for those cases is very weak.

 

And I think that the notable lack of demonstrable offspring makes it less likely that Joseph was having sex often or at all with many of the wives.

[Scott Lloyd]

I wonder if those who do such things know they are in violation of the law.

I don't think there's a law against making recordings, per se.

 

Organizers of an event can forbid it and make one's admission to the event conditional upon compliance.

 

If I were a local ward leader putting on an event such as this, and there were individuals present with whom I was unacquainted, I might do that very thing.

 

Also, now that this guys' picture has been made public, if I were a local leader, I think I would be careful to watch out for and bar him from any event that I organized.

[Calm]

Calmoriah, I love how fair your comments always are...thanks.

I do try. Thank you. But I must admit I don't try all the time. Edited April 11, 2014 by calmoriah