Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
DarkJedi wrote:
I agree with Ray, there is a difference in level of professed faith and in the level of open criticism between what I read from you and what I read from the others you mention, Bill.
I hope so!
The absolute best document I have ever read on stages of faith. I recommend anyone here have some sort of faith crisis at what ever stage they are read this. I also wish all the TBM’s could read as well http://www.thebattleofarmageddon.com/stages_of_faith.pdf ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.thebattleofarmageddon.com/stages_of_faith.pdf Old-Timer wrote:Fwiw, DB, there is a huge difference between you and the others on that list – and it’s an important one.
The question though is could every leader tell that difference. I am no longer confident that they can. For example yesterday at Church I was asked If my wife and I could meet with the Bishop on Tuesday. I am 99% sure it is a calling (primary teacher is my guess…. how do I say no?) and yet my stomach dipped a little worried that Salt Lake has asked him to talk to us.
mom3 wrote:Quote:in the midst of some of the faithful speaking ill of me and my work.
Ouch. Are you taking some hits right now? That just makes this Mamma Bear really mad.
My thoughts and prayers will go with you.
On facebook, my uncle n law chimes in, disagrees, but never supports his need to fix me with substance. On some of my posts a few members of FAIRMormon have made comments. A prominent scholar in the area of polygamy has said some mean things privately to me simply because I disagreed with him. and My local ward and stake seem to be hesitant to let me closer than arms length. Besides that though all is well in Zion. I also fear with Dehlin, Rock, Calderwoods, Van Allens (almost), Kate Kelly and others being sent packing there likely isn’t as big a divide between me and what the church considers apostate anymore. I no longer feel “safe”
Awakening wrote:Ok, i dont know how yo do the fancy quote box but Bill you say, “Thanks for the kind words…. It means so much to hear that especially in the midst of some of the faithful speaking ill of me and my work.”
Bill, you are doing so much good for so many, faithful speaking ill of you and your work? I’m sorry to hear that. I’ve listened to many of your podcasts. In fact another one today….Robert Keely which again was so good. How do you navigate this with your family? That is my hardest problem right now. I feel a bit frozen and hardly go to church at all. I’m so concerned about my kids at home ranging from ages 6 to 9. I want them to have some religion but I so don’t want them to be indoctrinated the way I was. How do you and your wife work with this?
Sorry, I just saw this Awakening. How I do it.
1.) I have my immediate families support and the support of others who email me weekly.
2.) My authority is within myself and the Holy Ghost. I have faith in JS, the BOM, and the Church but I don’t over extend that faith beyond where truth takes me.
3.) I feel called to open eyes and to help others see out of the box and for those who do see out of the box help them feel not alone and help them know they can navigate this and still believe.
lonely when all I want to do is help people in my new area but feel like everyone wants to keep me at arms length Got some flack from a few apologists who argued that my shaken hands and drawn swords episode was absurd and not congruent with the facts. I just released a part 2 as a premium episode that addresses the reason they give. Here they are in text so you can chime in 1.) Many folks in the church right now are struggling with 132. Not because of polygamy but because of the details of polygamy. While apologists keep defending that Joseph did indeed follow the rules God lays out in 132, I think many members would disagree and are struggling to see it. simply saying apologists see it and hence it is right seems to ignore that just because apologists/others do doesn’t make it so. There are differences of opinion. While I respect many of the apologists I don’t find it the best answer.
2.) Man in the white robe leads Lehi to the dark and dreary wasteland and then Lehi rather than depend on the angel that took him there, seems to decide to abandon that path and instead seeks out God dirrectly. While the man in the white robe being good is a valid assumption, the man not being good seems more logical to me and neither assumption changes our testimony of Lehi as a prophet or the Book of Mormon as scripture. In other words both views are valid and neither diminshes faith, hence without further light and knowledge both are permitted a seat at the table of faithful discourse
3.) Just because the dream involves a deceiving spirit does not limit the dream as unable to come from God. No more than Satan’s interference in the first vision limits Joseph vision as being not from God.
4.) apologists dismiss the Adam God revelation from Brigham simply because it does not affect salvation. I agree it doesn’t, yet it is huge in terms of precedent of dismissing what a past prophet claimed certainty and divine knowledge of a revealed truth. apologists can brush it aside as not important for one reason, but I will push its importance for a whole host of others.
5.) it is claimed without 132 we don’t have sealings and eternal nature of families and yet we have sealing keys that come from Elisha in Kirtland and we have other pieces of this puzzle in other places. Also 132 is not one revelation but several placed into one section. This if we throw out part we must throw out all of 132 and if we do that we lose key doctrines in the plan of salvation.
6.) Mary E R Lightner’s quote that “Joseph knowingly understood that the angel with the sword was a good angel” is the best defense against this theory by apologists but with her as the only witness and her account coming quite late in age (late 80’s) and time passed (62 years after the event), one can easily wonder if multiple events are being conflated into one story. that said this is the best rebuttal point against what I have said. The issue is apologists are also dismissing sources when they come really late and seem to not be substantiated by other witnesses.
7.) To offer others who had a testimony of polygamy as a defense, one will also have to deal with instances where others had a testimony and were wrong. (the brethren on race theories, others who had a testimony of adam-god, others who followed the Wooleys into fundamentalism, Heaven’s Gate, Jim Jones, etc… having others who feel led to support a teaching does not demand it be accepted as truth in a scholarly approach
8.) to argue that we must accept 132 because it is in the voice of the Lord is also a strong rebuttal point, though not as strong as one might think as LDS.ORG and Fair both acknowledge that angels can deliver divine messages as if spoken by the Lord himself – “Divine Investiture”
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1978/10/i-have-a-question?lang=eng http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_the_nature_of_God/Elohim_and_Jehovah “Sometimes it seems as if God the Father is speaking and then it seems to be Christ. Even angels speak as if they were Christ.” (SeeRev. 22:8–9, 12–16.)
9.) If Joseph was deceived apologists insinuate that this makes him less of prophet. I disagree as that’s making an assumption and one that is not a fact but a point of view. Is Brigham less of a prophet because he was mistaken about Adam God – self proclaimed revelation, how about the brethren in the 40’s because they were mistaken about race theories as Doctrine? This argument is weak and also opens a can of worms.
10.) apologists say truth is lost when we let go of hard things. Yet we have let go of any hard things in our faith (race theories, Adam God, Blood atonement, and there are bunches and bunches. Hard things are not necessarily from God. Again this is a opinion that to let go of ANY hard thing is faith diminishing. I know of hundreds of people who would disagree and have found increased faith as the Church has let go of old teachings and doctrines that were uncomfortable.
11.) To say many disagreed with the Adam God would be to open a can of worms as outside of Orson Pratt I am unaware of many leaders who felt Brigham was wrong as Heber Kimball and Wilford Woodruff also were certain he was right.
I think a big issue in Mormonism is to not allow various line of thought and to force people to eat the whole elephant or leave. Mormonism is so full of paradoxes, contradictions, and complexities, that to impose one view as absolutely right and all others must succumb to it leaves little room for for many.
I have had leaders tell me I had to wear a white shirt, had to interpret tithing as they do, interpret the WOW as they do, that resurrected beings will be white, that I must accept that Joseph never got anything wrong doctrinally while also allowing Brigham to get several doctrines wrong, to follow leaders even when they are wrong, to interpret “true and living” church as they do, and many others… hundreds and hundreds of imposed beliefs and yet I stand here to say the church whether it knows it or not is more flexible than all this nonsense.
This rigid mormonism doesn’t work for me and others. We need room. Nothing about the suggested option I speak of in the episode forces one to see the Church as not true or Joseph as a fallen prophet or worse a fraud…. It doesn’t. It does force us to see prophets as more fallible and see revelation as more open to error but in reality isn’t that already proven with other issues in Church history. It is messy. In the messiness you can’t tell people believe it all or leave…. rather in the messiness people need room to think it through and hold onto that which is good. Prove the principles of polygamy are good and you will easily win them to your side. Personally I struggle to see the way the brethren talked about and treated their wives as having God’s approval. So until I can make it fit, I set much of 132 on a shelf and worry about other things I know are true or at least good.
startpoor wrote:I don’t understand the apologists position on this one. They want us to believe 132 was spoken by God, AND they want us to believe JS was acting in accordance to Gods commands? How can any sane person believe both of those things? They should be thanking you for giving folks a reasonable way out of that conundrum.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah……. But they’re notAnn wrote:DBMormon wrote:I am taking a beating from some apologists over this ….
Hi, Bro. Reel – Where are discussions about this happening? If you have links, etc., I’m curious to see them. Do you plan to interview the Van Allens? (Then they can take some of the beating with you?) Good luck.
On my prrsonal Facebook page and on mormondialogueIlovechrist77 wrote:Great episode, Bill. However, I have some concerns about the 3 grand keys. I agree that we can’t physically touch Satan and his angels because they don’t have physical bodies. But couldn’t Satan and his angels make it seem like you’re touching them, because according to stories in the scriptures they can touch you? Maybe I misunderstood those stories in the scriptures. Hopefully you can help me or somebody can.
Wilford Woodruff wrestled with an evil spirit… can’t get more physical than that
Awakening wrote:Bill Reel is another I have appreciated so much. His podcasts as well as his insights shared have been really validating and comforting and insightful.
Thanks for the kind words…. It means so much to hear that especially in the midst of some of the faithful speaking ill of me and my work.
Thanks my friends. I have COPD (mild but constant asthma that I take prescriptiuon medicine for) humidity in Ohio makes breathing tougher, can’t wait for St. George air I am unaware of any support groups in Arizona. That said my family and I are moving to St. George. I leave Monday and should be there by Wednesday. St. George is not too far from arizona…. so if I can do anything from there or even travel to do something like that in your area, I am sure I can make it happen. Bill
