To: Daniel Peterson
MIME-version: 1.0

From: KRISTI

Below you will see a copy of a message that you sent to Mr. James White. You are a rude, sarcastic little troll-- which comes across all too clearly-- but then you turn around and say that *Mr. White* is the rude jerk! That is surely a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

I share this e-mail with you not to hurt your feelings, nor to make you angry (although I am certain that it will, since you seem to be in a state of almost perpetual anger anyhow)..but rather to show what a hypocrite and jerk-wad you truly are....

OF COURSE Mr. White bowed out of your exchange: you were losing the debate terribly, and you tried to cover your rear by being rude, insulting, vindictive, etc. There is no point in reasoning with someone who is beheaving so *UN*reasonably as you, and Mr. White demonstrated his intelligence by trying to end it. He rightfully recognized the futility of trying to communicate with an irrational person.

You apparently don't realize how "off-putting" your boorish behavior is. You did not engage in a "calm," "well tempered" correspondence with Mr. White-- your own words demonstrate this.

You weren't "teasing" him, you were being a rude Butt-Head-- own up. Call a spade a spade.

Shuckie-darn, just when I was about to become a Mormon, I came across your rude, irrational spiel, and it changed my mind! Guess I'm going to stay a Baptist after all!

Oh yeah, this "FARMS" thing you keep talking about, what is it, a Mormon magazine or Mormon website?--I suggest that you put the word "Funny" in front of "Farm" as this would be a more accurate title that reflects y'all. Aren't you the guys who believe that Jesus appeared to like the Aztecs or Mexicans or something after He was Resurreected???!!! Oh yeah, and Jesus also stopped by Disney Word too! And let's not forget that last week , Jesus was spotted with Elvis at a Burger King in Kalamazoo.

Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 12:42:49 -0700
From: Daniel Peterson
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Mr. Charm]

Mr. White:

You seem to think you have me. "Do remember, Dr. Peterson," you write, "that since you have been passing around my posts to others, your own posts, including this wondrous example of FARMS mentality, will be archived and readily available to anyone who wishes a glimpse into the world of LDS apologetics[?]."

Go ahead. I am puzzled that you do not seem to see how unpleasantly YOU come across. My lengthy post to you contained arguments and serious positions, however cheekily expressed. For you to respond merely by denouncing my arrogance and silliness and pronouncing me not worth your time was, among other things, (a) not a cogent counterargument, (b) disrespectful, (c) uncharitable, and (d) exactly what I expected from you.

I am quite capable of having a calm and well-tempered exchange. I have, as I say, had pleasant and respectful conversations with numerous people of other faiths, including several who are overtly critical of my beliefs. If you would like to do so, please shelve the hostility. Please cut the tendency to assume that your opponent is acting in bad faith, or from evil motives.

Perhaps you do not recognize how alienating your hyper-confrontational style is, and how personal you tend to make the dispute between Latter-day Saints and evangelicals. Perhaps you do not realize -- oh, but surely you must! -- how off-putting your aggressiveness is, and how (for many of us) it gets in the way of the message that, I presume, you sincerely want to preach. Sensing that you would react badly, I tweaked you. I was having fun. (You know, teasing somebody who responds in satisfying ways to such teasing.) It was perhaps wrong for me to do so, but you reacted precisely as I had anticipated.

It still appears to me that you fled a discussion when you realized that you were in a corner. Quite seriously, quite sincerely, that is how it appears to me. Leaving aside the question of my viciousness and my depravity, it seems so. Perhaps I am wrong, although I think not. But if I am wrong, it would be fitting -- certainly it would be the act of a disciple of Christ -- to correct me, not to assault me. Others had predicted that you would withdraw from the discussion. They are people who have followed your career somewhat, and they described it as your modus operandi whenever you seem to be losing control. (I am told that it happened at Temple Square earlier this month, when you were presented with evidence to which you had, in their view and in mine, no cogent answer.) You may despise me all you like, but your actions truly seem to me to be as I have characterized them, and as others had foretold.

Yet others, however -- and I am merely passing on what they told me -- predicted that your ego would never allow me to have the last word. Which, I admit, worried me, because I really don't have the time to get into a lengthy and quite futile e-mail catfight, especially with someone who evidently cannot even grant that I am a decent human being.

And now that their prediction also seems to be coming true, I am worried again. (Attacking Mormonism may well be an important component of your employment; defending the gospel of Jesus Christ is something I do in spare moments.)

What, by the way, is the "FARMS mentality"? Are you into faulty generalizations and stereotyping? FARMS did not write my posting to you. I wrote it. I am not FARMS, and FARMS is not Daniel Peterson. FARMS is a number of people, with widely varying styles, personalities, and approaches. There is no more a "FARMS mentality" than there is a "Jewish mentality" or a "black mentality." Latter-day Saints are individuals, as are Jews and blacks. As are fundamentalist and evangelical Protestants. (I know, because some are nasty and unpleasant, and some are very nice.) If generalizations like this really are permitted, there seems no principled ground on which you could criticize me for taking Ed Decker as the "norm" for anti-Mormonism -- if, indeed, I had ever thought to do so stupid a thing.

Daniel Peterson

Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 13:05:45 -0700
From: Daniel Peterson
Subject: Re: Mr. Charm

Going through my e-mail, I came across a posting containing the following, from someone who has been monitoring our exchange:

"By the Bye, never have I seen such arrogant rhetorical ranting with absolutely no substance behind it as in the White letters. Absolutely astonishing!"

I share it with you not to hurt your feelings, nor to make you angry (although I am certain that it will, since you seem to be in a state of almost perpetual anger anyhow), and not as evidence that my estimate of....