Episodes

Radio Free Mormon: 069: Daniel C. Peterson: The Artful Dodger of Mormon Apologetics

Radio Free Mormon speaks about the 1 year anniversary of his episode #33 Selling Your Soul for Apologetics…………. And you won’t want to miss this. It involves Kiwi57, Stephen “Bukkake” Smoot, and of course our dear friend Daniel C. Peterson.

In the previous Episode #33 RFM made it clear that Daniel C Peterson had lied but also that Dan had indeed added multiple other lies and obfuscations on top to buffer him from being accountable to his deception. But good ole’ Dan was clear he had not lied and he would in his own good time respond and clear his name…….. And here we are, 1 year later…… and no response yet!

Play

11 thoughts on “Radio Free Mormon: 069: Daniel C. Peterson: The Artful Dodger of Mormon Apologetics

    • Abinidai and the gang which followed in his footsteps needed to get a life too? King Noah and the Zoramites were the only true churches too.

    • Does having a life involve getting on the internet and telling people they need to get a life?

  1. Let me see if I “reelly” understand these apologists: You are practicing Priest-craft if you are seeking and telling truth about religion, and it is NOT Priest-craft if you are lying for a lying church which is lying for “Christ.” Got it now. Thanks for clarifying that, apologists.

    Now I understand the BoM even better. King Noah and the Zoramites were NOT practicing priest-craft. Now that’s further light and knowledge! Lie upon Lie, decept upon decept, here a little there a little…

    The growing heap of deception eventually grows so high we can pay to climb to heaven on it (Not Priest-craft).

  2. The 1832 First Vision account is still very suppressed to this day, as all 7 other suppressed vision versions contradicting each other and contradicting the official “vision” rather then adding to each other as claimed. Why does any church insist on keeping the obviously fraudulent account which contradicts the early history of the church?

    The flock (sheeple) doesn’t realize that the official Vision Version (1838) is puffed up, changed and is thus very contradictory to historical facts and church teachings of the Godhead in the early 1830’s and earlier. The now official 1838 Vision Version contradicts the first BoM, BoC, LoF, etc..

    The official First Vision Version (1838) simply proves itself a fraud with it’s own contradictions to documented LDS history in many ways. The bible does the same thing, changed over time by men with power and authority and thus it too contradicts itself historically and in doctrines and claimed “historical facts.

  3. I never once recall a seminary teacher talking about any other versions of the first vision than the canonized version. My parents never talked about multiple versions in FHE. Never mentioned at any youth conference or in any aaronic priesthood meeting, or in elders quorum or by any bishop. No mention in the MTC, or by either of my two mission presidents. Somehow a 1970 article published somewhere proves the church leaders didn’t suppress the history. I unknowingly lied to people about what j.s. said he saw as a missionary because I didn’t find and read the 1970 article ? (I was born in 1970 and the church didn’t start publishing old article on the internet until around the late 2000’s). The old white men leading the church are still liars when they joke that there was no suppression. You didn’t hear them educate their audience on how difficult it was prior to the internet to access information. The kids in the audience laugh because they have no perspective, and the old men know this, so the deception continues…

  4. oh man, the song at the end brings back memories. Loved that movie!!

  5. Not only was different first vision accounts suppressed; when church members were asked how the church came about, the answer given into the 1880’s was an angel with plates. Early church members didn’t know or heard very little of a “first vision”. Funny thing that about the time the rumor gets out about a different account is just about the time the LDS church starts using the first vision in missionary efforts. Apologists like Dan Peterson must not believe in the mormon god or Joseph Smith as lying will gain one the glory of the Telestial kingdom. Check out D & C section 76.

  6. Not only were different first vision accounts suppressed; when church members were asked how the church came about, the answer given into the 1880’s was an angel with plates. Early church members didn’t know or heard very little of a “first vision”. Funny thing that about the time the rumor gets out about a different account is just about the time the LDS church starts using the first vision in missionary efforts. Apologists like Dan Peterson must not believe in the mormon god or Joseph Smith as lying will gain one the glory of the Telestial kingdom. Check out D & C section 76.

  7. To thing that Dan Peterson use to be one of my Mormon Apologetic heroes. Sad…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*